| Killiana1a said: No, I have not forgotten. I still remember playing Anarchy Online and cancelling it after a month of playing. As for comparing every MMORPG to WoW it is the necessary and right thing to do as WoW set the benchmark, is still the MMORPG leader, and is the game to build one's MMORPG around in order to usurp WoW's throne. I was still playing WoW when Age of Conan and Warhammer Online came out. A few guildies left to play one or both, but sure enough, they were back within a month or two. I have not forgotten. As for the comparison between Bioshock and Modern Warfare 2, you are right eventhough you are leaving out the massive marketing push that Modern Warfare 2 had. As for a game being a failure or not, MMORPGS are judged on their monthly subscribers more than first week and first month sales alone. That being said, I am perfectly right and irrefutable in saying that Final Fantasy 11 has been a failure in comparison to WoW because it took 7 years for Final Fantasy 11 to reach 2 million subscribers, while WoW did that in less than 6 months. As for the original question by the OP or should I say whine from Square Enix, Square Enix is expecting Microsoft via Xbox Live to provide a free lunch in the form of Microsoft taking the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars per month to own, run and maintain the Final Fantasy 14 servers. I can understand why Microsoft would be hostile to giving Square Enix something for nothing. |
Again, calling FFXI a failure because it failed to outdo WoW is just flat out wrong. True, it didn't do nearly as well as WoW but that doesn't make it a failure. Not at all.
Again, a game doesn't have to be the best in whatever catagory in order to be a success. You can't say just because one game was wildly successful, all other games fail in comparison.
Also, saying every game should strive to be like WoW is why all those other games failed in the first place. FFXI was actually a success because it wasn't a WoW ripoff.
