Has Elite been marketed wrongly?

[MrTomsk]

Then I don't know what you mean by "driving sales". "Driving sales" would be taken to mean pushing sales up. Competition does the opposite of that, it reduces your sales and thus forces you to act to stop your sales from falling.



Look at the list of top selling games of all time. Tell me how far down the list you have to go before you find pew pew and pew. Incidentally Skyrim is on that list, Halo isn't. And if you look at the overall pattern you'll find that there aren't as many multiplayer PvP type games as there are other games. Puzzlers do well, but except for those sandbox games invariably do better than shoot 'em ups. Minecraft and GTA are the two most popular PC titles, and except for a smattering of Calls of Duty and one Battlefield I can't see hardcore action games on the list at all.

I've posted a lot of actual stats and figures to make my case here that the game doesn't have to be marketed in such an action-oriented way in order to be successful. Do you have anything a little more substantive to refute them?

I have to agree with FuzzySpider here, Competition does not drive sales, in fact it forces you to cut cost or innovate to retain market share. Reducing selling price will again help in driving sales, but is a doomed strategy as you can only reduce selling price so much.

What does drive sales is a unique selling point, something your competitors do not have (at least for a while) and for Elite, PvP combat isn't it. I have a horrible feeling E: D's marketing team is spending far too much time looking at market trends to see which direction the product should take rather than really looking at what they have and producing a strategy to deliver a sandbox with content that is a little bit different from the competition.

At the moment Elite is a framework with some unique selling points, if i was them, i would be looking at how i could better the game without turning it into World of Tanks or Candy Crush

 

[I and I Redeye]

Then I don't know what you mean by "driving sales". "Driving sales" would be taken to mean pushing sales up. Competition does the opposite of that, it reduces your sales and thus forces you to act to stop your sales from falling.



Look at the list of top selling games of all time. Tell me how far down the list you have to go before you find pew pew and pew. Incidentally Skyrim is on that list, Halo isn't. And if you look at the overall pattern you'll find that there aren't as many multiplayer PvP type games as there are other games. Puzzlers do well, but except for those sandbox games invariably do better than shoot 'em ups. Minecraft and GTA are the two most popular PC titles, and except for a smattering of Calls of Duty and one Battlefield I can't see hardcore action games on the list at all.

I've posted a lot of actual stats and figures to make my case here that the game doesn't have to be marketed in such an action-oriented way in order to be successful. Do you have anything a little more substantive to refute them?

Competition reduces your sales if you are a monopoly. Let's say Eve has the monopoly so that's good news for Elite and bad news for Eve. So we're both right but we look at it differently. Might be a fairer way to put it.

That list. All the games are for 12 yr olds. Except 2 of them, Skyrim and Diablo and I'm not sure about Diablo.
This is an mmo space sim. It's trying to compete with mmo space sims.
In order to to do that it has to market to that crowd.
That main crowd is Eve, SC, X-Rebirth then there's console and ofc there's an age group.
Hence the way the vids are made.

Then I imagine if they tried to market it another way. I just don't think the vids would have the same impact or draw the numbers.
Action draws the crowds and gets our attention.
Thats why solo players can't help themselves and have to come and have a peep at open play. Even if its just once.
I think that's why they do it. I also think they are doing it right.
It's just my opinion. Just my logic. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

[Dbrn47]

That's true enough. It's not even restricted to gaming either. I sometimes use Lynx spray to make those mangrove swamps beneath my upper arms slight less malignant to anyone who comes near to me. However, unlike as promised in their ad campaigns, unfeasably attractive women do not all hurl themselves at me in what can only be described as a feeding frenzy.

The thing is though that it isn't really necessary for FD to sell the game as a pew pew pew fest.

WARNING: DO NOT BUY THE FOLLOWING GAME!

Here is the trailer for X Rebirth.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRwj_Vu80m0

The game, as terrible as it was, still managed to generate awareness and interest without selling itself as The Battle of Britain 3300. I think there is definitely a market for slow paced and cerebral games. I think with the release of powerplay it's time to change up how they are selling this.

I bought this game on release. It's a great game now. You shouldn't swear people off of it at this point. Egosoft has a track record of delivering buggy unfinished rubbish at release and then polishing that product until it's gold. If you knew that from the get go, you're happy with it these days.

Don't think I don't understand what you are getting at. I do. There's just nothing you can really say that will change how a developer, a publisher, or some marketing graduate decides to market their product. Voicing your concern is fine, but it feels to me that you are putting more energy into this fight than it deserves since it is not a battle you can win. It's really up to the consumer to figure out what is and what isn't just hype. In the end, everyone is in it for the money, they have to eat.

 

[NeilF]

Competition reduces your sales if you are a monopoly. Let's say Eve has the monopoly so that's good news for Elite and bad news for Eve. So we're both right but we look at it differently. Might be a fairer way to put it.

That list. All the games are for 12 yr olds. Except 2 of them, Skyrim and Diablo and I'm not sure about Diablo.
This is an mmo space sim. It's trying to compete with mmo space sims.
In order to to do that it has to market to that crowd.
That main crowd is Eve, SC, X-Rebirth then there's console and ofc there's an age group.
Hence the way the vids are made.

Then I imagine if they tried to market it another way. I just don't think the vids would have the same impact or draw the numbers.
Action draws the crowds and gets our attention.
Thats why solo players can't help themselves and have to come and have a peep at open play. Even if its just once.
I think that's why they do it. I also think they are doing it right.
It's just my opinion. Just my logic. Maybe I'm wrong.

I hope you're not suggesting GTA V is designed for 12yr olds?

 

[FuzzySpider]

I bought this game on release. It's a great game now. You shouldn't swear people off of it at this point. Egosoft has a track record of delivering buggy unfinished rubbish at release and then polishing that product until it's gold. If you knew that from the get go, you're happy with it these days.

X-Rebirth was the game that made people painfully aware of the difficulty of getting refunds on Steam. My experience of it was only a few hours at the retail launch, but that was an appalling game. Any company that release such rubbish doesn't deserve a second chance.

Don't think I don't understand what you are getting at. I do. There's just nothing you can really say that will change how a developer, a publisher, or some marketing graduate decides to market their product. Voicing your concern is fine, but it feels to me that you are putting more energy into this fight than it deserves since it is not a battle you can win. It's really up to the consumer to figure out what is and what isn't just hype. In the end, everyone is in it for the money, they have to eat.

OK this comment confuses me. This isn't a fight or a battle, it's a discussion. If you've taken even a passing glance at my posts here and in the Steam threads you'd see that economics and business are an interest of mine. That I like the game of Elite only makes it more interesting. It really doesn't take a lot of energy to post in a forum.

 

[Dbrn47]

X-Rebirth was the game that made people painfully aware of the difficulty of getting refunds on Steam. My experience of it was only a few hours at the retail launch, but that was an appalling game. Any company that release such rubbish doesn't deserve a second chance.



OK this comment confuses me. This isn't a fight or a battle, it's a discussion. If you've taken even a passing glance at my posts here and in the Steam threads you'd see that economics and business are an interest of mine. That I like the game of Elite only makes it more interesting. It really doesn't take a lot of energy to post in a forum.

Again, common for Egosoft. I understand people not caring and not wanting to give them another chance. I kept the game and now it's good. Really all there is to it and I still don't agree with the "don't buy it" since it's been fixed.

It's a fight in the sense that you are speaking out against the marketing technique. Which is not worthwhile in my eyes. I suppose I mistook well formed and thought out words as passion for your stance. I didn't realize you were at the level where you can casually throw these counter points out there. For me, it takes some sort of energy, as passion for a topic usually does. My mistake and I'll try to be more clear for you next time.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Again, common for Egosoft. I understand people not caring and not wanting to give them another chance. I kept the game and now it's good. Really all there is to it and I still don't agree with the "don't buy it" since it's been fixed.

I have to confess I was a HUGE Egosoft fan. X3 Terran Conflict took up two years of my life. So of course I pre-ordered Rebirth and got myself giddy with excitement about it. What they handed out was... disappointing. My reaction to it was... well let us just say that some people should be thankful that force-choke doesn't actually work (I tried).

It's a fight in the sense that you are speaking out against the marketing technique. Which is not worthwhile in my eyes. I suppose I mistook well formed and thought out words as passion for your stance. I didn't realize you were at the level where you can casually throw these counter points out there. For me, it takes some sort of energy, as passion for a topic usually does. My mistake and I'll try to be more clear for you next time.

I can be a bit verbose. I'm not necessarily trying to change things though, and I am also interested in something else. Has the marketing technique actually effected the player base? We've got a lot of people who like PvP and pew pew pew type games. I am really interested to see if the way the game was sold has any role in that. It has wider implications for games such as Elite which are ongoing projects. If a game attracts a certain audience it could well find itself being pushed down a particular path by that audience. Self-fulfilling prophesies and all that.

 

[Gold Member]

Yesterday, en route to a community goal in the BV Pheonicis system, I got interdicted and then attacked. Not by a pirate, not by a bounty hunter, not by someone trying to prevent the goal from being met or someone looking to inquire about teaming up in a wing. This was someone who just wanted some PvP arena type combat.

This was, frankly, extremely irritating.

I've noticed around here a very large number of threads which basically ask for enhancements for PVP type combat. Many more threads demand that starter ships such as the Eagle are buffed to be able to compete with FDLs and Vultures. The common response to these threads are that this is Elite, duh, not EVE or some other arena shooter (I have said as much myself)..

Maybe you think a video of someone lasering a chunk of rock out of an asteroid and then scooping it would be exciting. It's called marketing. Marketing usually enhances the exciting aspects of the game. Nobody would buy a game that advertised itself as a pen, notebook, and lists of stations that sell various commodities.....i.e. a space-trucking game.

Now, the marketing of the game hasn't changed and yet you are here. So were you happy the game was more than just pew-pew and had at least the framework of trade, mining, exploration, piracy, bounty hunting, and ranks?

I explore, farm RES, go to conflict zones and bounty hunt. I do NOT trade or mine. The game sort of matches my expectations of the advertising. I really consider it a beta game no matter what the official status is. At least everything works but for the most part it's just a bare bones framework of what it will be in a couple of years.

By the way, you obviously know nothing about Eve. You should refrain from references to that game in your comments since it really lowers your credibility.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Maybe you think a video of someone lasering a chunk of rock out of an asteroid and then scooping it would be exciting. It's called marketing. Marketing usually enhances the exciting aspects of the game. Nobody would buy a game that advertised itself as a pen, notebook, and lists of stations that sell various commodities.....i.e. a space-trucking game.

Yes indeed. I mean when slow paced, almost sedentary sandbox games are marketed without the excitement and thrills they don't sell do they?

[video=youtube;MmB9b5njVbA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmB9b5njVbA[/video]

That explains why Minecraft is so incredibly unpopular.

Now, the marketing of the game hasn't changed and yet you are here. So were you happy the game was more than just pew-pew and had at least the framework of trade, mining, exploration, piracy, bounty hunting, and ranks?

I like the game as it is. It has its flaws of course, but the for the most part it's pretty solid I think. I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything here though. I didn't get the game on the strength of how it was marketed, as I explained earlier in the thread.

 

[EdzUp]

With power play it can be marketed as a 4x game, as I take if ever a major faction got totally hammered they would vanish from the galaxy.

The only thing we can't do at the moment is have bases of our own and research new stuff

 

[NeoMorph WTH]

This.

And also, people suggesting 'arena modes', get out please. This is an open world game, not an arena shooter. Get used to """griefers""" or get out of open. What would be reasonably is to ask for a real crime & punishment system (something is coming 'soon'), instead of asking for "arena modes"; and I hope the NPC's get more aggressive and get good soon too, maybe if they get 'griefed' by NPC's they will stop complaining.

I looked at this statement above and then I looked at the guy's sig... which is...



Diplomacy at its best lol.

 

[Gold Member]

Yes indeed. I mean when slow paced, almost sedentary sandbox games are marketed without the excitement and thrills they don't sell do they?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmB9b5njVbA

That explains why Minecraft is so incredibly unpopular.



I like the game as it is. It has its flaws of course, but the for the most part it's pretty solid I think. I'm not sure how that's relevant to anything here though. I didn't get the game on the strength of how it was marketed, as I explained earlier in the thread.

So what's your problem then? A space shooter with trading, mining, etc.... ANY mention of the less exciting occupations - mining, trading, grinding for rank would immediately drive off the largest part of the market. And any literature that describes 400 billion stars would automatically get the explorers. Minecraft is a pretty bad comparison by the way since over 60% of minecraft players are young, and 25% of them are VERY young. Also, it is less than half the price of ED. ED players age averages low 20's with almost 40% over age 25. There are virtually no Minecraft players over 30.

If you're going to talk about marketing, it helps if you understand how to compare markets. Minecraft is after a different market. ED needs to make a splash with as many types of players as possible and I don't care if it's not exactly the same they clearly took some notes on what EVE was doing to consistently get 30,000 players after 10 years on a subscription model in a game that is basically a windows plugin in many ways. They also probably rightly concluded that some older Eve players (myself included) has pretty much played out the old cluster and were ready to do other things in the genre.

So there are factions, empires, rough outlines of high-low-null security space, occupations like mining, trade, piracy, a nascent market where computer generated needs and commodities could just as easily be player driven, bounties, alliances, the beginnings of clans, group efforts to achieve supremacy in a small corner......

It's not the same game despite the many similarities and I'm glad. But what draws people to ED isn't going to be a commercial about space-trucking. The genre and the scale of the game already identify it as more than just a sandbox for space pew-pew. People who buy this game already know from the scale that it's more than that, and even if the trailer only shows action it seems likely they would get that it's not an arena style game.

 

[SCADVID]

It's just the way it is.
Competition drives sales more than a niche market.

This game had to be like this or it would fail as an epic mmo. It still can.
The industry know what is selling atm and build games accordingly. The games industry isn't as cheesy as hollywood but they've learnt alot from them.

Skyrim is a good example of a longer life game but it doesn't sell to the masses where other mmo's are still selling to the masses after many years.
Halo prolly made more money in its short life span than Skyrim or at least during the same period it was live.

It is showing that niche markets do have a place, though. EvE is a perfect example of a niche market. It's small, it's not going to overtake WoW, but for space game genre it's the leader with the longevity to prove it. WoW could not compete against it as it's very specialized (WoW is a "themepark" MMO that doesn't specialize in any specific genre. Consider it the Walt Disney meets Wal-Mart of MMOs).

What MMO developers discovered is if they don't directly "attack" WoW, they can carve their own niche. Compete with WoW face on (SWTOR is a perfect example), it won't work simply because the players invested too much time in WoW. The new games don't offer the security of a 10 year-old game does, either. That's why those WoW players didn't leave. Bad patches they go and play other MMOs, but they'll return back to the nest (like the others, I love my WoW toon, and I'll return to it). It doesn't mean the players are completely satisfied with games like WoW (oh, nooooooo, but playing other games is a diversion for a time). All that investment they put into their toons is why they can't leave (same applies to EvE and EQ/2 players). With WoW its a culture in itself, with it's own lexicography. If Blizzard had a radio and TV station it probably could be the next news network (I'm not kidding). I start the day reading the daily news, but there I am at the forums looking for blue posts (dev posts) and parking at Wowhead watching the latest WoW news. It's a life in itself outside the game even, a different type of social network.

BTW, Skyrim failed as a MMO because the reason it's franchise is successful is due to the customization solo games offer. MMOs can't allow that customization as persistent worlds have to be not only persistent, consistent. I knew as a MMO it will fail when I saw three letters -- PvP, too. Offline as a solo game, it'll be a hit again (due to modding).

The formulas are right there for anyone to see. Aim for a specific niche, and carve you a following. It works and it's successful in it's own right. No, they're not going to have WoW 2 on their hands (WoW is the leader due to it's longevity and it was a social medium before YouTube/Facebook/Twitter came along. Can't leave the game because too many you know...like my own family...plays it. EA could've offered free games, it still wouldn't matter if your friends/family are still playing WoW). Blizzard could launch almost anything off that built in market, which also shows developers the key to success with MMOs is building a community of your own; stick to what your franchise is about (not repeating the ESO problem or the SWTOR disaster); and let time do it's own work.

There's no "secrets" to it. It's not even "competition". It's building that community that community is the nexus of a long-term franchise.

 

[andyraptor]

Yesterday, en route to a community goal in the BV Pheonicis system, I got interdicted and then attacked. Not by a pirate, not by a bounty hunter, not by someone trying to prevent the goal from being met or someone looking to inquire about teaming up in a wing. This was someone who just wanted some PvP arena type combat.

This was, frankly, extremely irritating.

I've noticed around here a very large number of threads which basically ask for enhancements for PVP type combat. Many more threads demand that starter ships such as the Eagle are buffed to be able to compete with FDLs and Vultures. The common response to these threads are that this is Elite, duh, not EVE or some other arena shooter (I have said as much myself).

But why so many people who believe otherwise? A very large number of people appear to be here not to play Elite, but some other blast-a-thon game.

Those of you who have Steam installed, head on over to the Elite: Dangerous store page. They have 4 videos there to promote the game and all but one of them imply the game is basically glorious space battles of glory.

Look at this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwvjElmFCfE

Glorious eye candy of glory, but is that really Elite?

I got the game I expected and I got the game I wanted. But then I was never subjected to the marketing, I got the game on the strength of the old Elite games.

What about you lot?

NOTE: This isn't about the quality of the game or even whether you like the game. It's about whether the expectation of what the game is matches what is portrayed by FDs marketing department.

NOTE 2: This is not about the rights and wrongs of Solo and Open or about PvP or what someone should or shouldn't do. There are already loads of threads on that. This is about how the game is being sold to consumers.

I've highlighted the part in your very first sentence that sums it up for me

If I was a pirate would I hover around a known, publicly announced funnel area.... YES

In fact , contrary to NOTE 2, this is in fact just another Solo v PvE v PVP thread

If you are irritated.... you should be irritated at your own stupidity on expecting NOT to be attacked... the fluff about PROMO videos is just that.... fluff

caught .... pants down..... off to forum to cry.... job done

 

[Gold Member]

Had to give reps for the WoW community reference. I met my wife through playing old fashioned vanilla WoW.

 

[Chrisfs]

But why so many people who believe otherwise? A very large number of people appear to be here not to play Elite, but some other blast-a-thon game.

Those of you who have Steam installed, head on over to the Elite: Dangerous store page. They have 4 videos there to promote the game and all but one of them imply the game is basically glorious space battles of glory.

Look at this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dwvjElmFCfE

Glorious eye candy of glory, but is that really Elite?

I got the game I expected and I got the game I wanted. But then I was never subjected to the marketing, I got the game on the strength of the old Elite games.

What about you lot?

NOTE: This isn't about the quality of the game or even whether you like the game. It's about whether the expectation of what the game is matches what is portrayed by FDs marketing department.

NOTE 2: This is not about the rights and wrongs of Solo and Open or about PvP or what someone should or shouldn't do. There are already loads of threads on that. This is about how the game is being sold to consumers.

Yes that original trailer was not good marketing in that it conveyed a view of the game that would be disappointing to people not familiar with it before hand. That was unfortunate. Especially if it was because they felt that no one would buy it if they didn't market it like that. there are plenty of other games out there like that.
I, like you, knew what i was getting into and have on the whole, been quite happy with the game. I had played the original Elite and later Oolite. I am hoping Frontier has recognized that presenting a fuller picture of the game will serve them better in the long run.

 

[FuzzySpider]

Yes that original trailer was not good marketing in that it conveyed a view of the game that would be disappointing to people not familiar with it before hand. That was unfortunate. Especially if it was because they felt that no one would buy it if they didn't market it like that. there are plenty of other games out there like that.

I agree with you there. Even without that aspect of misrepresentation, which is what advertising is basically about these days anyway, I think the marketing of the game was (and still is) off base for a very different reason. If you go to gametrailers.com or one of the online gaming magazine sites like gamespot or IGN you can see multitudes of these kinds of trailers. As such they don't really stand out anymore.

 

[I and I Redeye]

It is showing that niche markets do have a place, though. EvE is a perfect example of a niche market. It's small, it's not going to overtake WoW, but for space game genre it's the leader with the longevity to prove it. WoW could not compete against it as it's very specialized (WoW is a "themepark" MMO that doesn't specialize in any specific genre. Consider it the Walt Disney meets Wal-Mart of MMOs).

What MMO developers discovered is if they don't directly "attack" WoW, they can carve their own niche. Compete with WoW face on (SWTOR is a perfect example), it won't work simply because the players invested too much time in WoW. The new games don't offer the security of a 10 year-old game does, either. That's why those WoW players didn't leave. Bad patches they go and play other MMOs, but they'll return back to the nest (like the others, I love my WoW toon, and I'll return to it). It doesn't mean the players are completely satisfied with games like WoW (oh, nooooooo, but playing other games is a diversion for a time). All that investment they put into their toons is why they can't leave (same applies to EvE and EQ/2 players). With WoW its a culture in itself, with it's own lexicography. If Blizzard had a radio and TV station it probably could be the next news network (I'm not kidding). I start the day reading the daily news, but there I am at the forums looking for blue posts (dev posts) and parking at Wowhead watching the latest WoW news. It's a life in itself outside the game even, a different type of social network.

BTW, Skyrim failed as a MMO because the reason it's franchise is successful is due to the customization solo games offer. MMOs can't allow that customization as persistent worlds have to be not only persistent, consistent. I knew as a MMO it will fail when I saw three letters -- PvP, too. Offline as a solo game, it'll be a hit again (due to modding).

The formulas are right there for anyone to see. Aim for a specific niche, and carve you a following. It works and it's successful in it's own right. No, they're not going to have WoW 2 on their hands (WoW is the leader due to it's longevity and it was a social medium before YouTube/Facebook/Twitter came along. Can't leave the game because too many you know...like my own family...plays it. EA could've offered free games, it still wouldn't matter if your friends/family are still playing WoW). Blizzard could launch almost anything off that built in market, which also shows developers the key to success with MMOs is building a community of your own; stick to what your franchise is about (not repeating the ESO problem or the SWTOR disaster); and let time do it's own work.

There's no "secrets" to it. It's not even "competition". It's building that community that community is the nexus of a long-term franchise.

Said it better than me.
Pretty good sum up.
I was being too general rather than specific.

 

[Chris M Fortune]

I don't think it's going to be markedly worse with the XBox crowd. They're all going to be stuck in Sideys and Eagles - it takes time (an awful lot of it) to get to the point where you can afford any ship config which could be termed more than a mild irritant bouncing off your windshield. I highly doubt that somebody playing anything up to a Cobra on an XBox would last more than a couple of minutes going up against a player in a Vulture or an ASP, much less a Python/Clipper/Anaconda. After a while, they'll get the message; to be honest, I doubt we'll see much of them in Open anyway.

Unfortunately this will just generate another round of "the big ships are too powerful, nerf them" until of course they get to fly them and suddenly all is right with the world. Also if you are determined then it doesn't take long to get up to a well equipped viper. Less than 20 hours game play on my current incarnation and I am almost fully kitted out for exploration in a cobra, this was using only exploration as a source of income which isn't the most efficient way of doing things.

 

[Comintern1919]

From the moment I heard there would be a modern Elite I envisaged Elite in a multiplayer universe where we are plonked in and have to make our fortune in an unpredictable and hostile universe. That was what I dreamed Elite could be when I was a child. Meeting other players, teaming up or fighting them and generally finding a whole universe populated by players, aliens and npcs for me to encounter.

The trailers show the kind of space battles I imagined would occur - Elite: Dangerous is now getting closer to the kind of universe I expected Elite to be about.

I certainly did not expect the game to fractionate the player base into separate modes. I expected one open universe where anything that could happen within the games limits would happen - and I would watch the universe evolve.

Please say you are not one of those that argue against Solo Mode being there at all.

And if you didn't expected there being a Solo Mode, you must have not informed yourself at all. In fact, at the very beginning of the Kickstarter Campaign, it was promised there would be an OFFLINE Mode. So there being at least a Solo Mode is in fact the least we can expect.

I dont know , the game calls its self ''cut thoat galaxy'' and ''dangerous'' yet ppl whine , cry , rage when they get shot...

People don't whine because they get shot, people *complain* because they get should for no other reason than lulz. And that's not what this game is about. Being pirated, being killed by bounty hunter because you have a bounty, all that is okay. But being killed when you are unarmed with no cargo.... maybe after you spend hours exploring and you are on your way to sell it. Because lulz. That's the problem.

BTW, Skyrim failed as a MMO because the reason it's franchise is successful is due to the customization solo games offer. MMOs can't allow that customization as persistent worlds have to be not only persistent, consistent. I knew as a MMO it will fail when I saw three letters -- PvP, too. Offline as a solo game, it'll be a hit again (due to modding).

*SKYRIM* failed as a MMO? I think you mean *The Elder Scrolls Online* failed as a MMO. Skyrim is a single-player part of the Elder Scrolls Franchise.