Originally posted by lugal JJ82, your evidence is all opinion and un-scientific. So it is bullshit.
Congrats, you just stated what I have been pointing out for many pages now. The argument made against the Forbes article is complete BS because I did what he did. The only things written that actually proved anything was written on Forbes because it was the only thing using ACTUAL INDUSTRY EVIDENCE.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
um. no. he said that the industry is going to do subs + cash shop because that is what will get the highest amount of revenue for companies. in the west there is a portion of people whom will invest in a game above the sub price. he calls it leaving cash on the table to go sub only. the F2P only model isn't viable in the west. At least not yet. That's his argument. And he has examples to back it up. The response from the kid at Forbes is laughable at best.
I know what he said and he provided no actual evidence to show it makes more, it was all opinion, opinion that doesn't even hold up to actual scrutiny or even lists what information its being held up against (a complete lack of a single F2P game name he used to compare it against). The Forbes writer at least provided actual evidence of the point being made.
Most popular MMOs in history, in the west.
WoW, Sub based. 12 million at peak
GW1, B2P. 6 million at peak
GW2, B2P. 3+ million
Neverwinter, F2P 3+ million
What is the next closest Sub based game? SWTOR topped 2 million sales but obviously never came close to having that many subs going at the same time due to the massive drop offs in subscribers leading to F2P shortly after those sales numbers were announced.
WoW is the one and only sub based game remotely popular. And Neverwinter is the ONLY actual F2P game in the west, to say that F2P doesn't work in the west has no basis due to the small sample size since Asian F2P games also available in the west don't actually say how much revenue is generated in each market.
Considering that you said "in the west" and sub, you might want to remove the 6+ millions of Chinese players from your WoW number (and the 1+ million of Koreans on too , but I do not have an official estimate for them).
I know what he said and he provided no actual evidence to show it makes more, it was all opinion, opinion that doesn't even hold up to actual scrutiny or even lists what information its being held up against (a complete lack of a single F2P game name he used to compare it against). The Forbes writer at least provided actual evidence of the point being made.
Most popular MMOs in history, in the west.
WoW, Sub based. 12 million at peak
GW1, B2P. 6 million at peak
GW2, B2P. 3+ million
Neverwinter, F2P 3+ million
What is the next closest Sub based game? SWTOR topped 2 million sales but obviously never came close to having that many subs going at the same time due to the massive drop offs in subscribers leading to F2P shortly after those sales numbers were announced.
WoW is the one and only sub based game remotely popular. And Neverwinter is the ONLY actual F2P game in the west, to say that F2P doesn't work in the west has no basis due to the small sample size since Asian F2P games also available in the west don't actually say how much revenue is generated in each market.
Considering that you said "in the west" and sub, you might want to remove the 6+ millions of Chinese players from your WoW number (and the 1+ million of Koreans on too , but I do not have an official estimate for them).
I will use the same tactics the argument is attempting to make to discredit the opposing side. Someone needs to point out the hypocrisy and the best way to do it seems to be by using back at those believing it.
Even though I should because it hurts the sub argument even more by removing half the people paying it.......
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I will use the same tactics the argument is attempting to make to discredit the opposing side. Someone needs to point out the hypocrisy and the best way to do it seems to be by using back at those believing it.
Even though I should because it hurts the sub argument even more by removing half the people paying it.......
But Dancey used evidence were you didn't use evidence. You're just saying stuff like the Forbes guy.
I will use the same tactics the argument is attempting to make to discredit the opposing side. Someone needs to point out the hypocrisy and the best way to do it seems to be by using back at those believing it.
Even though I should because it hurts the sub argument even more by removing half the people paying it.......
But Dancey used evidence were you didn't use evidence. You're just saying stuff like the Forbes guy.
No he did not, he said so himself that NOTHING he is using can be confirmed. You are just dismissing stuff that doesn't fit in with your personal beliefs.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I will use the same tactics the argument is attempting to make to discredit the opposing side. Someone needs to point out the hypocrisy and the best way to do it seems to be by using back at those believing it.
Even though I should because it hurts the sub argument even more by removing half the people paying it.......
But Dancey used evidence were you didn't use evidence. You're just saying stuff like the Forbes guy.
No he did not, he said so himself that NOTHING he is using can be confirmed. You are just dismissing stuff that doesn't fit in with your personal beliefs.
I see your hypothesis and raise you a theory.
He said the first part was conjecture, I think the payment model is actual internal research, but who knows. Maybe he just had a vivid dream when he made that second graph.
He said the first part was conjecture, I think the payment model is actual internal research, but who knows. Maybe he just had a vivid dream when he made that second graph.
I see your theory and toss it out the window.
Go read it again, right before his chart he states it himself by listing every single thing he did to come up with his OPINION, which is what it is because he states none of it can be confirmed and he even admitted he used anecdotal evidence.......that anyone is taking him seriously shows the sad state of the human race.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I applaud Forbes for taking a chance and being critical, beyond the fanboy hype and media hype someone needs to step up and call out these companies for offering half done products for such a high premium, some just flat out prey on people.
Quality control is hitting an all time low in MMORPG's and soon I would hope these companies would start getting criticized at the very least.
A fool and his money are soon parted seems to be company mantra these days and it should not be acceptable nor respectable.
I applaud Forbes for taking a chance and being critical, beyond the fanboy hype and media hype someone needs to step up and call out these companies for offering half done products for such a high premium, some just flat out prey on people.
Quality control is hitting an all time low in MMORPG's and soon I would hope these companies would start getting criticized at the very least.
A fool and his money are soon parted seems to be company mantra these days and it should not be acceptable nor respectable.
One might argue that only a fool would assume a product is half done without trying the product, or in this case if you have tried the product, only playing 5% of it.
That's so unfair. oh wait, no its perfect. A nice long list of non MMOs with a 10 year long gap coming after his one and only MMO that just so happens to be the exact same design as the one being currently made.
Thanks for helping show he is out of touch with the market that is stagnant with old ideas.
You think daoc is out of touch with what people want right now ?
You think a game made when there were only a few million people playing MMOs around the world is in touch with the 30+ million players around the world today that have been playing clones of clones of clones of those ideas created all those years ago and are damn sick of them? lol.
DAOC is the pvp verson of SWG for old school mmo people. If you think people don't still want what it had in an updated mmo....you should put that in your sig...like a big warning sign when you get into these stupid know-it-all arguments.
DaoC invented PvP for carebears, the casuals, those that needed their hand held so much they required racial faction locks and to have their pride CREATED for them. DaoC players couldn't handle PvP in previous games, it was too hard for them.
Never compare DaoC to SWG again, they are polar opposites in every way imaginable. If anything, you have shown yourself to lack any knowledge of the depth of the genre which is stuck in its clone rut because developers are targeting people like you. Something we don't see in any other gaming field.
As someone who's been playing MMO's since Ultima Online, and who spent most of his time PvPing and murdering people in that game, let me say that your assessment of the situation is laughable at best, but you're right, No one should compare DAOC and SWG, because DAOC was a PvP Masterpiece with great mechanics, and SWG was a fucking mess that deserved the death it got. the PvP in DAOC to this day is the best PvP to be had in an MMO, and i'm sorry, Killing some tard running around in a forest hunting Skeletons or what not really PvP.... That's the equiv of killing underleveled people in an MMO, It's the equiv of killing Up Arrow people in GW2.. In other words, It requires no skill, and if you thought it did, you're a terrible player who should quit the internet. Real PvP is when people can actually fight back... Real PvP is actual good PvP Mechanics... So in the future, If you're going to compare SWG with anything, Might i suggest comparing it to LOTRO PvP, though even Lotro monster play was better designed so i don't know how well that'd work.
Cross-platform. They're not aiming at PC players, they're hoping to attract lots, and LOTS of console players.
PS4 now requires a subscription in order to play online.
SoE has come out and said that they won't be charging any subs in part because all future games are to appear on the PS4 and they feel that requiring people to PAY TWICE to play a game isn't the way to go about it.
To play ESO on the console you HAVE TO PAY TWICE.
If no one plays the game on PS4 it's not going to last. It'll end up like every other MMO that's released after wow with a sub, free to play.
It's going to flop on the console.
Forbes writer is correct.
Just curious, what model is pathfinder releasing with?
PS4 now requires you to pay a subscription to playstation plus in order to play games online, just like xbox live. Sony themselves stated that they will not release any subscription games in the future because of the change to playstation plus.
There are far more people that play games on consoles than on the PC, just the PS4 alone will sell more games than the PC version. Having to pay for a playstation plus subscription and then pay a subscription for the game itself is going to be a barrier to entry for a LOT of people.
Game will eventually be free to play. WoW is an anomaly, and when people find out that it's nothing like any previous elderscrolls game it'll end up just like ToR.
PS4 now requires you to pay a subscription to playstation plus in order to play games online, just like xbox live. Sony themselves stated that they will not release any subscription games in the future because of the change to playstation plus.
There are far more people that play games on consoles than on the PC, just the PS4 alone will sell more games than the PC version. Having to pay for a playstation plus subscription and then pay a subscription for the game itself is going to be a barrier to entry for a LOT of people.
Game will eventually be free to play. WoW is an anomaly, and when people find out that it's nothing like any previous elderscrolls game it'll end up just like ToR.
Wrong. When the intelligent person realizes it does play like an ESO game but with obvious MMO sacrifices, the game will do just fine. In addition, you underestimate how many people were bummed by the fact that they couldn't play in ANY Elder Scrolls universe with their friends. That is why a Mod was created to try to bring multiplayer into the fold. That mod failed miserably. This most likely won't.
He can stand on his assertion based on 7+ years of failed high budget MMO failures.
Define "Failure".
Or, actually, don't bother. This is MMORPG.com, where D3, a game that sold a bajillion copies, setting sales records, is routinely called a failure.
Failure to me is any game that started P2P that transitioned to F2P because subscriptions couldn't support the game any longer. And D3 was labeled a failure not because of monetization but because it deviated from its core too much. It basically casulafied the diablo series creating a shell of its former self.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Do not discuss your impressions of the beta, what your "friend" said about the beta, etc. It's all covered under NDA. This also means no links to streams or posting/linking to media (screenshots, videos) from the beta.
I am not in the beta - i am hyped 6.0 and i dont plan to play it. Imho it will be another Hayfire-MMO that does not live up the expectations. They will probably not have a loss of Money though not much gain either. Forbes is more right than wrong.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
I think that a subscription based game is a decent indicator of how successful the game will be in terms of quality itself. F2p is more of a cash grab because they generally force you into buying their cashshop items. The only one that doesn't that I can think of is GW2. Not to mention the casual, "I don't really like mmorpgs playerbase(Mostly the mainstream crowd)", aren't the ones that pay subscriptions(They rather drop $50.00, kill everyone easily for 2 weeks then quit out of boredom) thus the focus is more on them since they don't like mmorpgs; they hop from new title to new title, and the industry follows them.
The ones who grew up with mmorpgs or undestand what they should be, are the ones willing to shell out 15 a month, but for a good game. The last part is the reason why you see the subscription method failing. Mmorpgs have been stagnant chasing after the big "WoW' dollars and not innovating anything like the older mmorpgs did. The subscription community I think(Perhaps most of the mmorpg base) ;are tired of the themepark roller coaster, "dungeon raid for all your gear 1000s times", follow a set path and "effect the world none-so-ever", tab target games. What irritates me the most is those who shouldn't be primary focus have the most say.
Negatives of a F2P
----------------------
-Cashshops
-Cesspool players(Although P2P has them aswell but monthly sub is a deterrent)
-Lesser game
-Dumbing down of mechanics and overall thinking element of the game
-Pay to win
-Less substantial updates
-Huge grind and disavantages
Positives of F2P
---------------------
-Play before you pay
-Usually Casual gameplay(I wouldn't consider this a positive but some might), besides the grind.
-No commitment so you can hop to the next shiny, F2P WoW clone, and spend 40 dollars to unlock a GUI, abilities, and a set of gear that will take the non playing player 50+ hours or never to obtain.(Sorry I guess this was more satire)
I personally think the whole F2P method is a scam and ends of costing more to play the game normally than it would if you paid a subscription, not to mention the slew of negative features associted with a game that started a F2P or has gone F2P MMO. For any non casual mmorpg player F2P; is a horrible trend currently on the market. Unforunately, we are no longer the biggest consumer in the mmo player base, thus games aren't aimed to be good games anymore;rather to be: make the most money. The only redeeming factor I can think of is not feeling cheating out of $60.00 if a game is terrible like SWTOR.
Now if you actually get a mmo based on previous principals like UO or SWG and making a great game their main priority, then you'll see a substantial profit and subscription based games will become the best income once more.
I believe the attributing factors for F2P being so popular are: Too many mmorpgs out there, too many mmos being utterly disappointing, and Casual/WoW crowd mmorpg gamers have too much sway in the genre. Once again make a great game then great wealth is yours. So while I agree with the Forbes article; P2P is a losing method, I also like to injecture that is because of terrible games.
The mere fact that most MMOs these days are free2play is one of the starkest pieces of objective evidence that innovation in the market has become stagnant. The reason people are not willing to pay for any given game is because there are other games out there of roughly equal quality that are free. And the reason that there are so many games of roughly equal quality is not because there are a lot more games, but because all of the games are copy-cats. But if a game was of such quality that no alternative could be found to recreate the experience it made possible, people would pay for it.
Indeed, that is why we used to pay for MMOs, there were no games out there that could replace the experience we were getting from our chosen game. Now days, however, every game is so similar to the next that a petty thing like the subscription fee can actually weigh in on one's decision over which game to play.
Basically, the games these days suck, which is why they are begging you to play them for free.
I doubt very much that a generic game like ESO has any intention of remaining pay2play. They are just cashing out on the initial excitement that accompanies any new blockbuster release . . . and the ES brand.
PS4 now requires you to pay a subscription to playstation plus in order to play games online, just like xbox live. Sony themselves stated that they will not release any subscription games in the future because of the change to playstation plus.
There are far more people that play games on consoles than on the PC, just the PS4 alone will sell more games than the PC version. Having to pay for a playstation plus subscription and then pay a subscription for the game itself is going to be a barrier to entry for a LOT of people.
Game will eventually be free to play. WoW is an anomaly, and when people find out that it's nothing like any previous elderscrolls game it'll end up just like ToR.
Wrong. When the intelligent person realizes it does play like an ESO game but with obvious MMO sacrifices, the game will do just fine. In addition, you underestimate how many people were bummed by the fact that they couldn't play in ANY Elder Scrolls universe with their friends. That is why a Mod was created to try to bring multiplayer into the fold. That mod failed miserably. This most likely won't.
I'm going to have to disagree about me being wrong in regards to the game playing like any previous elder scrolls game.
A lot of the fans of the series wanted to be able to play co-op in an elder scrolls game.
Pretty much every subscription based MMO that's released after WoW has switched its revenue model to free to play, along with a good portion of the ones released prior.
TESO is very much aiming for the console market. Sony now requires a subscription to playstation plus, just like Microsoft requires a live subscription. If you think that's not a barrier to entry....
Sony themselves said that they won't charge subscription fees to any games that releases on the PS4 because they don't want people to pay twice to play them.
I think it's amazing that in a market that has pretty much completely shifted away from the sub only model to either freemium or completely free to play, some people think that a guy who writes for a financial mags website is off is rocker when he says that TESO going with the sub model is mistake.
Bashing the guy seems pretty irrational given the reality of the MMO genre today. One would think that some people are simply up in arms over the article because they're fans quick to deride any form of negative comment towards the game.
Just for the record, I pay a sub to DCUO and WoW. Just so no one thinks I'm just another "cheap gamer who just wants everything to be free." I don't mind the subscription model myself, I just don't think that today it works unless you're world of warcraft or EVE online (which more than likely wouldn't have subscription fee today if it wasn't for PLEX).
"It’s impossible to confirm these figures without the cooperation of each game’s developer and none of them are going on the record anymore with these figures. But by triangulating from press releases, SEC (and other government filings), talking to industry insiders, and looking at anecdotal evidence from many sources, we can get into the ballpark for some analysis.
Here are my estimates for the top* MMORPGs in the Western MMO market:"
That is from right above his chart. You cannot triangulate the revenue of a game when a massive corporation is filing their total earnings with the SEC, that right there is a red herring. EA reports over a billion in revenue, you cannot possibly come remotely CLOSE to finding out how much SWTOR made for them when they have revenue coming in from 100+ games. As for press releases, please. Lastly, industry insiders? Another bogus thing to say. He could have spoken to Ripper X for all we know.
Now factor in that he gave NO information about what F2P games he is comparing this income to AND the fact that one sub game, WoW, is making up more than half the income of subscription games....and why the hell is that penguin game on the list?!? Its a clearly one sided argument unlike the Forbes article which is taking ACTUAL information from both sides of the industry.
But I'm not hung up on it being guesses. The original Forbes article was amateurish guessing by an MMO outsider with no reliance on facts of any sort and only assuming that the SWTOR experience is the definitive word on the sub model.
The mmorpg article is educated guesses after an effort to gather what info could be gathered given the little official information about subs available.
We know you are not hung up on it being guesses because those guesses fall in line with your personal beliefs.
This is what makes your saying their being educated extremely laughable. More so when you factor in that Sony, EA and other major studios are stating publicly that F2P is the best model, while smaller companies and out of touch with reality developers like Fior still cling to the past.
BTW, you may want to look up what "anecdotal evidence" means......he included that in his list of "sources" to protect his backside if he got called out on how he is utterly full of it.
Dancey at least provided actual numbers and the methodolgy he used to derive those numbers. The Forbes author didn't provide any numbers or methodology. For all we know, he's working off what his barber told him. In reality no one knows for sure because the data isn't made public. Even the studio heads don't have any verifiable data outside of thier own studio's. Everybody including you and I are long on opinion and short on data.
However, I'll take someone that actualy publishes thier data, data sources and methodolgy for open scrutiny over someone that won't any day.
Originally posted by lugal JJ82, your evidence is all opinion and un-scientific. So it is bullshit.
Congrats, you just stated what I have been pointing out for many pages now. The argument made against the Forbes article is complete BS because I did what he did. The only things written that actually proved anything was written on Forbes because it was the only thing using ACTUAL INDUSTRY EVIDENCE.
What "Industry Evidence" ? Please cite where the Forbes author provided the data or methodology he was using? Please cite where he even described what source or sources he was using to base his conclusions on?
Originally posted by azzamasin Originally posted by MyriaOriginally posted by azzamasinHe can stand on his assertion based on 7+ years of failed high budget MMO failures.
Define "Failure".Or, actually, don't bother. This is MMORPG.com, where D3, a game that sold a bajillion copies, setting sales records, is routinely called a failure.Failure to me is any game that started P2P that transitioned to F2P because subscriptions couldn't support the game any longer. And D3 was labeled a failure not because of monetization but because it deviated from its core too much. It basically casulafied the diablo series creating a shell of its former self.
So in other words, the definition for failure is whatever someone wants it to be at any given time when describing a game they do not like.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Comments
Roses are red
Violets are blue
The reviewer has a mishapen head
Which means his opinion is skewed
...Aldous.MF'n.Huxley
Congrats, you just stated what I have been pointing out for many pages now. The argument made against the Forbes article is complete BS because I did what he did. The only things written that actually proved anything was written on Forbes because it was the only thing using ACTUAL INDUSTRY EVIDENCE.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Considering that you said "in the west" and sub, you might want to remove the 6+ millions of Chinese players from your WoW number (and the 1+ million of Koreans on too , but I do not have an official estimate for them).
I will use the same tactics the argument is attempting to make to discredit the opposing side. Someone needs to point out the hypocrisy and the best way to do it seems to be by using back at those believing it.
Even though I should because it hurts the sub argument even more by removing half the people paying it.......
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
But Dancey used evidence were you didn't use evidence. You're just saying stuff like the Forbes guy.
No he did not, he said so himself that NOTHING he is using can be confirmed. You are just dismissing stuff that doesn't fit in with your personal beliefs.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I see your hypothesis and raise you a theory.
He said the first part was conjecture, I think the payment model is actual internal research, but who knows. Maybe he just had a vivid dream when he made that second graph.
I see your theory and toss it out the window.
Go read it again, right before his chart he states it himself by listing every single thing he did to come up with his OPINION, which is what it is because he states none of it can be confirmed and he even admitted he used anecdotal evidence.......that anyone is taking him seriously shows the sad state of the human race.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
I applaud Forbes for taking a chance and being critical, beyond the fanboy hype and media hype someone needs to step up and call out these companies for offering half done products for such a high premium, some just flat out prey on people.
Quality control is hitting an all time low in MMORPG's and soon I would hope these companies would start getting criticized at the very least.
A fool and his money are soon parted seems to be company mantra these days and it should not be acceptable nor respectable.
One might argue that only a fool would assume a product is half done without trying the product, or in this case if you have tried the product, only playing 5% of it.
There Is Always Hope!
As someone who's been playing MMO's since Ultima Online, and who spent most of his time PvPing and murdering people in that game, let me say that your assessment of the situation is laughable at best, but you're right, No one should compare DAOC and SWG, because DAOC was a PvP Masterpiece with great mechanics, and SWG was a fucking mess that deserved the death it got. the PvP in DAOC to this day is the best PvP to be had in an MMO, and i'm sorry, Killing some tard running around in a forest hunting Skeletons or what not really PvP.... That's the equiv of killing underleveled people in an MMO, It's the equiv of killing Up Arrow people in GW2.. In other words, It requires no skill, and if you thought it did, you're a terrible player who should quit the internet. Real PvP is when people can actually fight back... Real PvP is actual good PvP Mechanics... So in the future, If you're going to compare SWG with anything, Might i suggest comparing it to LOTRO PvP, though even Lotro monster play was better designed so i don't know how well that'd work.
I was comparing the "fandom" each game had, not the actual games to each other.
Cross-platform. They're not aiming at PC players, they're hoping to attract lots, and LOTS of console players.
PS4 now requires a subscription in order to play online.
SoE has come out and said that they won't be charging any subs in part because all future games are to appear on the PS4 and they feel that requiring people to PAY TWICE to play a game isn't the way to go about it.
To play ESO on the console you HAVE TO PAY TWICE.
If no one plays the game on PS4 it's not going to last. It'll end up like every other MMO that's released after wow with a sub, free to play.
It's going to flop on the console.
Forbes writer is correct.
Just curious, what model is pathfinder releasing with?
I think its 3 times they have to pay.
1- Internet Connection Fee
2- PS4/XBONE Connection Fee
3- ESO Subscription Fee
Bringer of Eternal Darkness and Despair, but also a Nutritious way to start your Morning.
Games Played: Too Many
I'm assuming this is sarcasm.
My post wasn't.
PS4 now requires you to pay a subscription to playstation plus in order to play games online, just like xbox live. Sony themselves stated that they will not release any subscription games in the future because of the change to playstation plus.
There are far more people that play games on consoles than on the PC, just the PS4 alone will sell more games than the PC version. Having to pay for a playstation plus subscription and then pay a subscription for the game itself is going to be a barrier to entry for a LOT of people.
Game will eventually be free to play. WoW is an anomaly, and when people find out that it's nothing like any previous elderscrolls game it'll end up just like ToR.
Wrong. When the intelligent person realizes it does play like an ESO game but with obvious MMO sacrifices, the game will do just fine. In addition, you underestimate how many people were bummed by the fact that they couldn't play in ANY Elder Scrolls universe with their friends. That is why a Mod was created to try to bring multiplayer into the fold. That mod failed miserably. This most likely won't.
There Is Always Hope!
Failure to me is any game that started P2P that transitioned to F2P because subscriptions couldn't support the game any longer. And D3 was labeled a failure not because of monetization but because it deviated from its core too much. It basically casulafied the diablo series creating a shell of its former self.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
The game is still under NDA, folks.
To give feedback on moderation, contact [email protected]
I am not in the beta - i am hyped 6.0 and i dont plan to play it.
Imho it will be another Hayfire-MMO that does not live up the expectations.
They will probably not have a loss of Money though not much gain either.
Forbes is more right than wrong.
"Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"
MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM
I think that a subscription based game is a decent indicator of how successful the game will be in terms of quality itself. F2p is more of a cash grab because they generally force you into buying their cashshop items. The only one that doesn't that I can think of is GW2. Not to mention the casual, "I don't really like mmorpgs playerbase(Mostly the mainstream crowd)", aren't the ones that pay subscriptions(They rather drop $50.00, kill everyone easily for 2 weeks then quit out of boredom) thus the focus is more on them since they don't like mmorpgs; they hop from new title to new title, and the industry follows them.
The ones who grew up with mmorpgs or undestand what they should be, are the ones willing to shell out 15 a month, but for a good game. The last part is the reason why you see the subscription method failing. Mmorpgs have been stagnant chasing after the big "WoW' dollars and not innovating anything like the older mmorpgs did. The subscription community I think(Perhaps most of the mmorpg base) ;are tired of the themepark roller coaster, "dungeon raid for all your gear 1000s times", follow a set path and "effect the world none-so-ever", tab target games. What irritates me the most is those who shouldn't be primary focus have the most say.
Negatives of a F2P
----------------------
-Cashshops
-Cesspool players(Although P2P has them aswell but monthly sub is a deterrent)
-Lesser game
-Dumbing down of mechanics and overall thinking element of the game
-Pay to win
-Less substantial updates
-Huge grind and disavantages
Positives of F2P
---------------------
-Play before you pay
-Usually Casual gameplay(I wouldn't consider this a positive but some might), besides the grind.
-No commitment so you can hop to the next shiny, F2P WoW clone, and spend 40 dollars to unlock a GUI, abilities, and a set of gear that will take the non playing player 50+ hours or never to obtain.(Sorry I guess this was more satire)
I personally think the whole F2P method is a scam and ends of costing more to play the game normally than it would if you paid a subscription, not to mention the slew of negative features associted with a game that started a F2P or has gone F2P MMO. For any non casual mmorpg player F2P; is a horrible trend currently on the market. Unforunately, we are no longer the biggest consumer in the mmo player base, thus games aren't aimed to be good games anymore;rather to be: make the most money. The only redeeming factor I can think of is not feeling cheating out of $60.00 if a game is terrible like SWTOR.
Now if you actually get a mmo based on previous principals like UO or SWG and making a great game their main priority, then you'll see a substantial profit and subscription based games will become the best income once more.
I believe the attributing factors for F2P being so popular are: Too many mmorpgs out there, too many mmos being utterly disappointing, and Casual/WoW crowd mmorpg gamers have too much sway in the genre. Once again make a great game then great wealth is yours. So while I agree with the Forbes article; P2P is a losing method, I also like to injecture that is because of terrible games.
MurderHerd
I'm going to have to disagree about me being wrong in regards to the game playing like any previous elder scrolls game.
A lot of the fans of the series wanted to be able to play co-op in an elder scrolls game.
Pretty much every subscription based MMO that's released after WoW has switched its revenue model to free to play, along with a good portion of the ones released prior.
TESO is very much aiming for the console market. Sony now requires a subscription to playstation plus, just like Microsoft requires a live subscription. If you think that's not a barrier to entry....
Sony themselves said that they won't charge subscription fees to any games that releases on the PS4 because they don't want people to pay twice to play them.
I think it's amazing that in a market that has pretty much completely shifted away from the sub only model to either freemium or completely free to play, some people think that a guy who writes for a financial mags website is off is rocker when he says that TESO going with the sub model is mistake.
Bashing the guy seems pretty irrational given the reality of the MMO genre today. One would think that some people are simply up in arms over the article because they're fans quick to deride any form of negative comment towards the game.
Just for the record, I pay a sub to DCUO and WoW. Just so no one thinks I'm just another "cheap gamer who just wants everything to be free." I don't mind the subscription model myself, I just don't think that today it works unless you're world of warcraft or EVE online (which more than likely wouldn't have subscription fee today if it wasn't for PLEX).
Dancey at least provided actual numbers and the methodolgy he used to derive those numbers. The Forbes author didn't provide any numbers or methodology. For all we know, he's working off what his barber told him. In reality no one knows for sure because the data isn't made public. Even the studio heads don't have any verifiable data outside of thier own studio's. Everybody including you and I are long on opinion and short on data.
However, I'll take someone that actualy publishes thier data, data sources and methodolgy for open scrutiny over someone that won't any day.
What "Industry Evidence" ? Please cite where the Forbes author provided the data or methodology he was using? Please cite where he even described what source or sources he was using to base his conclusions on?
Failure to me is any game that started P2P that transitioned to F2P because subscriptions couldn't support the game any longer. And D3 was labeled a failure not because of monetization but because it deviated from its core too much. It basically casulafied the diablo series creating a shell of its former self.
So in other words, the definition for failure is whatever someone wants it to be at any given time when describing a game they do not like.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.