Curse

Snow Bunny · Feb 04, 2008, 07:56 PM // 19:56

I assume it to be total: about 2 mil, active: 500k, everyday: 200k

Antheus · Feb 04, 2008, 08:02 PM // 20:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Sry for the double post, but I disagree. Halo 3 (and pretty much any multiplayer oriented FPS) is a multiplayer game based on competition. It is very popular. I don't think that is a valid generalization (though it is a good point).

Halo 3 is successful for the same reason. It's the FPS equivalent of WoW. It's not that good. As FPS go, it's pretty mediocre.

Quote:

WoW is successful because Blizzard is successful.

Blizzard's success is a consequence.

WoW is built on lessons learned by SOE from EQ. Read SOE's publications on how to attract masses - make everyone a winner. They've documented observations from EQ in many scientific studies.

Key to success in MMO is making everyone a winner, regardless of effort. This is the legacy of EverQuest. Blizzard just used Vivendi's $100 million to polish everything that SOE couldn't, and media connections that international entertainment consortium brings to spread WoW far enough.

For the record - WoW's US market share at peak was only 3 times that of Everquest many years ago. The remaining 7+ million come from Asian markets, where a strong marketing campaign was launched. Again, lessons from EQ were used to adjust the content for those markets. Gold farmers included. Now compare the numbers vs. investment. Compared to everquest, WoW cost 10 times more at least - and it only managed to reach 3 times the gamers.

Sadly, players play little role in today's MMO development. It's all just entertainment business. And that is something Vivendi did for Blizzard.

Quote:

I assume it to be total: about 2 mil, active: 500k, everyday: 200k

The numbers Anet published on their server infrastucture would indicate they can handle between 80k-120k concurrent. Whatever the exact number, during events they are often exceeded, leading to lag.