Lord of the Rings Online

Seems an interview was done this past week with Mr. Steefel on LOTRO, and several things have been said that could upset many a player of LOTRO

1. Steefel feels LOTRO could be as big as if not the one to take the crown from WoW

Those are fighting words, and no indications exists that show it can do this right now. He uses the movie as an example of advertising, yet it is still 2 years down the road...

2. Change to the payment model of 14.99 a month

How does the Lifetimer feel about this if they go to Free to play with cash shop or other methods. I knew the Lifetime payment plan would burn some people eventually.

3. LOTRO is the game being discussed as a console port of some sort

How does the Lorist feel about an Xbox live crowd playing their game?

Thoughts on this? Is Steefel crazy?

Eurogamer talks to Steefel

Sigh, this is a bit of an attempt to make something more-so than it is.

What was actually said:

for number 1: "There's another level of success, which is reaching a certain mass-market critical mass, which to be totally fair, only Blizzard has achieved completely so far. We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

for number 2: "This is a franchise that's going to continue for years and years and years, and there's no way that the singular, monolithic, USD 14.95 a month subscription model is going to last for years and years and years all by itself... it has to change."

for number 3: "we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console."

Mountain out of a mole hill, relax OP!

First who cares if  tomorrow they made the game free.   I have two lifetime accounts, only for six months now.   Would I complain if Turbine made the game free, I would be a bit disappointed but so what.    Of course many would complain, but you know if you're so worried about $200 you shouldn't be wasting time in an MMO.

I believe and hope Turbine will implement a friends system where if you get friends to join you both get extra experience and the ability to summon them.   Also be nice to see a mount thrown in. 

If MoM is as good as Turbine has been hinting at and they implement a 'friends' system like WoW, LOTRO could start to make major gains on WoW. 

I go on record, Tubrine won't do away with the monthly fee any time soon.  

Originally posted by Lazer7

 

Sigh, this is a bit of an attempt to make something more-so than it is.

What was actually said:

for number 1: "There's another level of success, which is reaching a certain mass-market critical mass, which to be totally fair, only Blizzard has achieved completely so far. We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

for number 2: "This is a franchise that's going to continue for years and years and years, and there's no way that the singular, monolithic, USD 14.95 a month subscription model is going to last for years and years and years all by itself... it has to change."

for number 3: "we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console."

I have to say, that is definately completely different from what the OP posted - interesting to see how people perceive things so differently to what was actually stated.

Some people love drama. Springer is old, and so they have to create or cause it themselves. If you think this is bad, it has caused a large amount of jibber on the general mmo forum. This is an interview about the future, not some power crazed rant. At any rate, the cost of MMO's is going to increase as inflation does. MMO's started at about 2.95 USD after all.

As a lifetime subscriber F2P of any sort would really piss me off...not because I've already paid (because I've already got my money's worth)...but because F2P games suck.  It transforms it from a game into a money sink where people who really aren't interested in "gaming" buy all the cool features (ie. micro-transaction assumption).

It would turn LotRO from a game full of dedicated, lore luvin' gamers into a game full of asshats who barely know how to play the game...IMO.

_{what does it matter if it is on the xbo360 or ps3 both can use a keyboard and mouse and you woould probably never now it unless someone told you they were on one.}

_{And they are a company tring to make money if you do not like the product stop buying simple as that.}

Originally posted by Itirel

Originally posted by Lazer7

 

Sigh, this is a bit of an attempt to make something more-so than it is.

What was actually said:

for number 1: "There's another level of success, which is reaching a certain mass-market critical mass, which to be totally fair, only Blizzard has achieved completely so far. We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

for number 2: "This is a franchise that's going to continue for years and years and years, and there's no way that the singular, monolithic, USD 14.95 a month subscription model is going to last for years and years and years all by itself... it has to change."

for number 3: "we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console."

 

I have to say, that is definately completely different from what the OP posted - interesting to see how people perceive things so differently to what was actually stated.

Actually the comments are from the posted article here

Eurogamer synopsis

And as the previous poster noted the wording, lets look at some other lines of value...

Steefel states...

"We think that we are the game that has the most likelihood of being the second to do that, but we're not there yet."

Yet, goes on to say

"It's a challenge, but we're confident that we can get there, especially with something of this broad appeal and high quality."

So, yes, for #1, he thinks he can match or beat WoW! Those are some big statements.

#2 Actually can be much worse...

He goes on to state

"For people that want to have a more casual relationship with the game, and just have fun a couple of hours, a couple of times a week, right now I think we have a difficult value proposition. They're paying a premium price to get a whole bunch more than they actually want. So, maybe there's room to satisfy those people in a slightly different way."

So, if you are a lifetimer, you pay that full price, but play 10 -20 hours a month. Lets say they reduce to 10-20 hours a month for 5 bucks. Do you as the lifetime payee feel you got the best deal then?

Then for #3

"we're talking right now about taking games and putting them on console, or building games specifically for console"

This ends up being the only questionable material, as the author of the Eurogamer article specifically pulled LOTRO out of the conversation, but I do not see it when reading in depth...

But, the main point remains a biggie...

By stating these things the way that Steefel has, it's already grabbed some blogger attention also. Was it all in the plan to advertise MoM finally?

Tobold suggests Steefel is smoking too much pipeweed

"And as I don't have subscription numbers and can only "measure" the MMO blog buzz about LotRO, I must say that I think I'm not the only one with that attitude. The Mines of Moria will just get buried under WAR and WotLK."

Seems the feeling is overall that LOTRO cannot make it in the dog eat dog world of MMOs to be such a huge success as they think.

Is it possible that LOTRO could get a million players? Can LOTRO be bigger than WAR?

You add more to his quotes than is there. You also fail to realize that he:

1: did not state he was going to trump WoW

2: did not say what monitary changes were in plan an when

3: no one really cares if consoles get to play the game.

This is really not worth the arguement however, as you have your mind bent on some strange perspective. Have fun with it mate; and may your ranting free you of this built up frustration of who knows what.