Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Vanguard: Saga of Heroes: All About F2P

1235

Comments

  • PainlezzPainlezz Laguna Hills, CAPosts: 616Member Uncommon

    Those limitations are pretty much exactly the same as EQ2's which drove me away from that game. 

     

    Nothing like paying to play EQ2, logging back in a few weeks later (sub expired) and having all your gear and such being unusable. 

     

    Such an epic failure F2P model.  Game is dead, will remain dead.

  • BerikaiBerikai Columbus, OHPosts: 162Member

    The matrix looks way to limiting compared to EQ2.

    EQ2 allows housing and fishing to bronze.Also EQ2 allows I believe 20g per level,so if your character is a 40 they could have 8 plat.That's just on 1 character also.You're really going to be hindered when crafting also,because of lack of bag space.

    Looks like any notion I had to tinker with this game just went out the window.Oh well there's many many games to play atm anyway.

  • AdoniAdoni Tucson, AZPosts: 347Member Uncommon

    I'm disapointed. That's all I have to say.

    image
  • rakasanrakasan austin, TXPosts: 2Member

    One simple word will kill this model:  performance.

    Vanguard is a beautiful game world, with arguably some f the best art and rendering available in an MMO.

    But even with years of hardware improvements, running the game on high settings is difficult.

    And the never solved problem of "hitching" will drive off anyone that was not desensitized to the problem years ago.  Any kid that can run Skyrim smoothly then logs onto Vanguard will be thinking "WTF?", followed by uninstall.

     

  • elf8blisself8bliss LA, CAPosts: 305Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by remyburke

    Common gear = bad idea.

     

    So close to being acceptable otherwise. Shame.

    Totally agree! I can handle all the other restrictions, but common gear, please!

  • cadriccadric FrederikshavnPosts: 15Member

    Was ok with the matrix untill I saw the restricted to common items.. That blows MAJOR ass.

  • HellCasterHellCaster Kansas City, KSPosts: 201Member

    The structure of this so-called "F2P" offering is so typical of SOE. Time has shown that they will never change from the greedy, disconnected corporate trash that theyshow themselves to be.

    Playing: GW2 & Robocraft

  • UtukuMoonUtukuMoon ParisPosts: 1,066Member
    Originally posted by Kenze

    the Vanguard community is NOT going to be welcoming to f2p users.  they should open a New server(no xfers) when the game goes F2P

    WTF are you talking about,everyone i talk to are happy to have the FTP,many of us have been playing since release,their is nothing a FTP can get that we haven't already got.

    We welcome FTP players.

  • BeilochBeiloch Sun City, CAPosts: 74Member

    if you can't afford $15 a month or $20 for ALL their games, or even less than $15 if you pick and choose, you should probably think about getting a job instead of playing video games.

    I'm not talking about anyone speficially so this can't fall under the heading of personal attack.

  • UtukuMoonUtukuMoon ParisPosts: 1,066Member
    Originally posted by Beiloch

    if you can't afford $15 a month or $20 for ALL their games, or even less than $15 if you pick and choose, you should probably think about getting a job instead of playing video games.

    I'm not talking about anyone speficially so this can't fall under the heading of personal attack.

    I have to agree with this to be honest.

  • Effin_RabbitEffin_Rabbit Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 773Member Uncommon

    Thats what the last nail being pounded into the coffin sounds like.

  • Dren_UtogiDren_Utogi OuterSpacePosts: 1,710Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Beiloch

    if you can't afford $15 a month or $20 for ALL their games, or even less than $15 if you pick and choose, you should probably think about getting a job instead of playing video games.

    I'm not talking about anyone speficially so this can't fall under the heading of personal attack.

    you dont live in america do you. Our jobless rate is astronomical right now

    reviews are !@#$ing stupid. Play what you love.

  • TalinTalin West Babylon, NYPosts: 824Member

    I am considering subbing when FTP begins (to have more people to play with), but I think the structure for this FTP is PATHETIC. If I wasn't intending to sub I would not consider wasting my time on the FTP portion with all of the restrictions in place.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,205Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Beiloch

    if you can't afford $15 a month or $20 for ALL their games, or even less than $15 if you pick and choose, you should probably think about getting a job instead of playing video games.

    I'm not talking about anyone speficially so this can't fall under the heading of personal attack.

    I can afford $15 a month for more than one game.  This game isn't worth $15 a month.  It may be worth a few bucks in SC here and there and maybe the odd month at Gold, but that's it at most.

    If the F2P model were better I would play this off and on and then spend some money on it occasionally.  It's not about being able to afford the game, but the game being worth the same sub fee as some current games.

    You see the game might be worth that $15/month to you and the 300 other people playing it currently, but to the other 15 million MMO gamers it isn't.  Get it now?

  • monarc333monarc333 New York, NYPosts: 615Member Uncommon
    I think they have monkeys running the show over at SOE. Anyone with a little brain matter would know this FTP bullshit is a glorified trial. Not a new and exciting way to play the game. Shit pisses me off.
  • junzo316junzo316 Raleigh, NCPosts: 1,684Member Uncommon

    Was looking forward to the conversion, but looking at the list...it's a no-go for me.  The restrictions are horrible for a F2P.  They should have used a better model.

     

  • zinger71zinger71 Fort St John, BCPosts: 57Member
    I'm a subscriber and even I have to admit that the limitations to F2P players is ridiculous. I was hoping this would increase the popolation in-game, but alas, I now have doubts. Poor F2P model. Sad.
  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,449Member Uncommon
    This is not f2p. There should be another name for games that give you access to 50% of the game unless you pay 15 bucks a month. With the quality I see in GW2 I cant see paying 15 bucks a month for any MMO.

    Here is what I digest, same model VG wants to put out but let us upgrade for a 1 time fee of 60 bucks. Add new content in your item shop and make money for giving quality product, not for the right to log into the game. Really? Only gold membership can equip a weapon above common? I will pass, no thanks.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • GyrusGyrus Lost City of ZPosts: 2,335Member
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    This is not f2p. There should be another name for games that give you access to 50% of the game unless you pay 15 bucks a month. With the quality I see in GW2 I cant see paying 15 bucks a month for any MMO.

    ...

    I agree - there needs to be different names for games that are "Free 2 Play" that run on different models. 

    How about something like this;

    Pay to win = P2W = old microtransaction model

    Play to Earn = P2E = Games where you can earn points to buy content / items by playing

    Freemium = Games with areas restricted to subscribers only.

    Buy to Own = B2O =where you can buy zones / content / items and continue to own them even without a subscription.

    Unlimited trial  = you can play up to a certain level.

    So really, thinking about it there is a bit of overlap in some models...

    For example

    Wizard 101 is an Unlimited trial with Freemium / B2O option.

    LotRO and DDO are P2E + Freemium / B2O games.

    Unlimited trial would be AoC

    etc

     

     

    As for SOE - yes they never really understood customers or "Free 2 Play".

    They have experimented with it a lot and I believe they are trying to find the 'sweet spot' where they can maximise their revenue while not allowing players to have too much for free... while at the same time not driving them away... sucking them in to buy more.

    This is what I believe they were doing with Pirates of the Burning Sea.  They constantly changed and meddled with the system and rules.  My belief is that they were seeing just how much they could squeeze players.

    Interestingly - if you GOOGLE PotBS you get this:

    Pirates of the Burning Sea » Home

    www.burningsea.com/
    Pirates of the Burning Sea™ is an MMORPG featuring high-seas action and adventure in a bold world of pirates and plunder. Set against the backdrop of the ...

    Free to Play!

    You can now play Pirates of the Burning Sea™ for free! No ...

    Australia and New Zealand!

    Pirates of the Burning Sea has now launched with a dedicated ...

    Forums

    Antigua - Roberts - General Discussion - The Map Table - First

    Captain's Club members

    Those players who are not Captain's Club members can purchase ...

    Download Installer

    Download Installer. Click the above button to download the ...

    Store

    Purchase Pirates of the Burning Sea! Wax Seal Decoration ...

    And following those links is interesting because if you follow those links it's hard to get the correct information:

    The "Free to Play" link doesn't tell you what you get (and more importantly DON'T get) for your money?

    The "Australia and New Zealand!" link - links to BigPond which is more than 2 years out of date.  BigPond no longer have any involvement with PotBS.

    The "Store" lists "Pirates of the Burning Sea is a subscription based MMO."!

    It also directs people to the Steam Store - which is yet another dead end.

     

    All this is typical of SOE marketing

    ...and before anyone says "But that is an FLS page!" yes, but SOE (are supposed to) do marketing and billing) so you would think someone from either company (FLS or SOE) would be on the ball about this?

    This link http://www.burningsea.com/page/news/article&article_id=271108 talks about the development of "F2P" with regard to PotBS and there are some interesting insights in there.

    It seems to me that PotBS was a F2P experiment for SOE (in partnership with FLS).  They really had little to no idea how it would work - or what players were prepared to pay for - or what players were prepared to put up with!

    It also didn't help that PotBS was an Instanced Lobby Game.

     

    But SOE didn't really care about that.  IMHO they were more concerned with making the "F2P" model work and more importantly - turn a profit!

    Years later - they are still trying to emulate companies like Turbine - but they won't.

    Why not?

    Because SOE doesn't understand what is important with regard to selling games.

     

    It has to be fun.

    And if it's an MMO it has to be long term fun.  Fun in a way that makes people want to log in regularly for days / weeks / months on end.  Fun that makes people want to keep returning to the game and think about it perhaps months after they played it last.

    Because "F2P" will not save your game.  Not if it's a bad game to begin with and / or not if you make your F2P so limiting that people cannot enjoy it without the constant spectre of having to pay hanging over their head.

    People will play F2P games (and even spend money on them!) if they can do so on their own terms without feeling any pressure to do so.

    SOE simply doesn't get that.

    Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.

  • William12William12 Saint paul, MNPosts: 680Member

    There is 1 plus here.  Pay 15$ a month for the station pass and play every SOE game as gold.  Who else can offer that ?

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 17,975Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by remyburke

    Common gear = bad idea.

    So close to being acceptable otherwise. Shame.

    Agreed.

    It is a big misstake, I was just thinking "time to start playing VG again" when I saw it and decided to do something else instead. 

  • Loke666Loke666 MalmöPosts: 17,975Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by William12

    There is 1 plus here.  Pay 15$ a month for the station pass and play every SOE game as gold.  Who else can offer that ?

    If you are interested in 2 of the games it is a good deal but I kinda feel myself done with EQ 1 & 2 after all this time.

  • teakboisteakbois Parlin, NJPosts: 2,154Member
    Originally posted by Gyrus

     

    But SOE didn't really care about that.  IMHO they were more concerned with making the "F2P" model work and more importantly - turn a profit!

    Years later - they are still trying to emulate companies like Turbine - but they won't.

    Why not?

    Because SOE doesn't understand what is important with regard to selling games.

     

    It has to be fun.

    And if it's an MMO it has to be long term fun.  Fun in a way that makes people want to log in regularly for days / weeks / months on end.  Fun that makes people want to keep returning to the game and think about it perhaps months after they played it last.

    Because "F2P" will not save your game.  Not if it's a bad game to begin with and / or not if you make your F2P so limiting that people cannot enjoy it without the constant spectre of having to pay hanging over their head.

    People will play F2P games (and even spend money on them!) if they can do so on their own terms without feeling any pressure to do so.

    SOE simply doesn't get that.

    This is kind of all over the place, but there is certainly some truth in it.

    F2p will not save your game, this is true.  Bad games are bad games.  You get an initial spark of interest around L2 or STO, but are these games popular past the initial month or two?  Not really.  Because they are not good games (or they are games with extremely limited appeal.  L2 will never, ever be interesting to someone who hates 'korean grinders.').

    But this whole notion that 'SoE doesnt get it' is wrong.  Oh, there are things they 'dont get it' about, but ths isnt one of them.  They arent interested in getting people that occasionally play and drop a few bucks here and there, they ultimately want subscribers.  If the model hasnt been successful for them in EQ2, they would have rolled out something different for EQ and VG.  I played on the EQ server that opened with the f2p launch.  By the time people got to the point where the f2p restrcitions mattered, many of them had subbed already.  In the locked-content f2p model, you reach the point where you are required to spend money fairly quickly.  Of course in the SoE model, the only time you ever reach that point is high end, max level content.

    You say they are trying to emulate Turbine.  Its obvious they got the idea from Turbine, because DDO is what sparked the whole trend, and then when Turbine followed with LOTRO, it was the first time a still successful game went f2p.  But at this stage EQ2 has probably surpassed LOTRO in market share, and DCUO's conversion has been a comparable success to DDO.  Maybe its the model, maybe its the games are better, you can theorize all you want, but SoE certainly isnt looking up at Turbine.

    The question is, is Vanguard good enough for people to sub.  There is certainly a segment of the population that raves about VG as this great, forgotten MMORPG.  If VG really does have appeal for more than just a small niche, then this model will work.  The gear restriction is a psychological one and not a mechanical one, so the people that are intrigued by the game will play past it until they make their decision to sub or not based on the quality of the game.

  • gaeanprayergaeanprayer Somewhere Out There, PAPosts: 2,320Member Uncommon

    I don't get where SoE is going with this one. They're taking a game very few people played or cared about, and trying to make it successful with a f2p model that's so restrictive, you'd need to sub anyway to actually play.

    If that sounds bass ackwards, it's because it is. They seem to be pretty intent on killing this game. I feel bad for the people that have loved this game and hoped f2p would bring in the community it needs to thrive. I don't see it happening, now. I'd be feeling pretty crushed.

    "Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."

  • GyrusGyrus Lost City of ZPosts: 2,335Member
    Originally posted by teakbois
    ...

    But this whole notion that 'SoE doesnt get it' is wrong.  Oh, there are things they 'dont get it' about, but ths isnt one of them.  They arent interested in getting people that occasionally play and drop a few bucks here and there, they ultimately want subscribers.  If the model hasnt been successful for them in EQ2, they would have rolled out something different for EQ and VG.  I played on the EQ server that opened with the f2p launch.  By the time people got to the point where the f2p restrcitions mattered, many of them had subbed already.  In the locked-content f2p model, you reach the point where you are required to spend money fairly quickly.  Of course in the SoE model, the only time you ever reach that point is high end, max level content.

    EQ might be attracting some subscribers but it is no-where near a roaring success.  And maybe SOE would prefer subscribers rather than 'zone buyers'.  If anything - that just shows how far behind the times and out of touch they are?

    Also, as people have pointed out - simply saying "It's a subscription game therefor it must be $15/month!" is out of touch too.  $15/month is what people expect to pay for a new MMORPG with a ton of content and regular updates - not a dated one.

    You say they are trying to emulate Turbine.  Its obvious they got the idea from Turbine, because DDO is what sparked the whole trend,

    No.  It was KingsIsle with Wizard 101 - Turbine improved on that model slightly

    and then when Turbine followed with LOTRO, it was the first time a still successful game went f2p.  But at this stage EQ2 has probably surpassed LOTRO in market share, and DCUO's conversion has been a comparable success to DDO.  Maybe its the model, maybe its the games are better, you can theorize all you want, but SoE certainly isnt looking up at Turbine.

    I think they are.  Well that is to say other companies want to do what Turbine has done and breath new life into old games.  But the difference is that Turbines games (DDO in particular) were unique in that they were ideally suited to this sort of model.  Largely because the whole Pen and Paper DDO franchise was like this too.

    The question is, is Vanguard good enough for people to sub.  There is certainly a segment of the population that raves about VG as this great, forgotten MMORPG.  If VG really does have appeal for more than just a small niche, then this model will work.  The gear restriction is a psychological one and not a mechanical one, so the people that are intrigued by the game will play past it until they make their decision to sub or not based on the quality of the game.

    That is the question.  Well, part of the question.  The other part of the question is is Vanguard good enough for people to sub at the suggested price?  If the monthly sub was cheaper - would that make a difference?

     

    Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.

Sign In or Register to comment.