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!

'The market has spoken very loudly that [F2P] is the model they like'

1246715

Comments

  • steelwindsteelwind Folsom, CAPosts: 345Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by steelwind

    The funniest thing is that it is the definition of insanity "repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting different results".

    That's not the definition of insantiy or even close. That is a bastardized version of a comment made by Albert Einstein.

    Maybe you should have run a spell check on my posts as well and further derail the topic on my grammar? Considering you knew exactly what I was saying, my point still stands regardless if I looked up the exact comment made by Einstein or not.

    Another note which just occurred to me about this mighty successful GW2, that it is the common opinion that GW2 cannot be played long-term as a main MMO. So basically this successful game needs to be supplemented with another MMO. So unless you LOVE temporary content, how do you play GW2 in it's current state long term? Again you get what you pay for.

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,293Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by steelwind

    The funniest thing is that it is the definition of insanity "repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting different results".

    That's not the definition of insantiy or even close. That is a bastardized version of a comment made by Albert Einstein.

     I always thought it was a bit silly myself as rarely is anything ever the same.

    The actions may be the same but the people may be different, you may be different, attitutudes and culture may be different...

    edit - and I think the actual quote was "repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,941Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Manolios
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Originally posted by Cirin
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Originally posted by Cirin
    Originally posted by steelwind
    And at the same time we have the least local player base in history and MMO"s which were originally made for long-term commitments measured in years has turned in to months if not days. People playing MMO's like single players games, consuming content then abandoning them isn't what MMO's are supposed to be about.

    The funniest thing is that it is the definition of insanity "repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting different results". F2P and the crowd that supports it, is one of the driving factors that is ruining what MMO's were supposed to be. I truly believe nothing will change, AAA MMO's with actual deep content as well as long term support via patches and innovation will continue to be P2P and the others, you will get what you pay for....

     

    This....so much...this.

    Name a mmorg that provides value for money for their SUB in comparison to EVE, GW2, GW1 (examples of good cash shop games)

     

      When you list the games you're playing as GW2, Diablo(seriously!?) and Rift(again...really!?) then obviously you won't see eye to eye.  Although I don't play it currently WoW has much better value imo, EQ2 for their subs also.  

      GW2 has zero content and, as pointed out earlier, relies on crappy mini games that last a month to draw you in.  The only reason I play it currently is because it's something that's entertaining for an hour before I'm dreadfully bored of it.  I love the game itself but they can't seem to get their balancing down for pvp and it makes it fairly pointless to play for anything beyond the PvE aspect of it.  I love how they wanted it to be an E-Sport and there's NO WAY that would be considered at this point.

     

      Im talking value for money aka content per pound spent (regardless of personal favourites or attacks on a persons gaming history (odd))  WOW's content release is well know for being pitifully slow and certainly not £10 a month greater than GW2.  For example, WOW April fools release = nada, GW2 is 3 zones.  personal taste asside, Blizzard should be pumping out huge volumes of content that far exceeeds any other game to justify the extra money they take of you. 

    Sub does not = greater value for money as things stand in the markety currently - maybe it will change.  If for exdample a mmorg came out with a sub of say £4 a month, then I would be tempted if it was good, thats competitive.

     

     

    i preffer quality than quantiy when it comes to content.

    btw you know what wow (and other sub games) gives you that gw2 (or other b2p or f2p) dont? stable community. not good or bad, but stable. i m playing wow and i m in a guild that almost every day i see and chat with same ppl. almost same happens server wide. in my gw2 and tera guilds, every time i log in i see other ppl. many new joined, many left, many have days to log. i hate that.

    i love when i meet ppl i used to play with before some years ago. today i met again 2 kids i played back in BC. it was a nice feeling. i didnt play even a single hour. i just talk with them, just that.

    i like f2p, but in games i dont spent much of my time or much effort. if i want to play serious and competitive, i ll go to a sub game. at least me :)

      Content per £ paid has got nothing to do with the quality of person playing, just looks at wow general chat.  I am also in a good guild with lots of friendly people (Eve and GW2)  its all subjective, but whats not subjective is the amount of content - for e.g some would argue that GW2 fractals were not to their taste, or WOW raids, but the question is who gives greatest amount of content per £.

    Here is a thought, It is well known that Blizzard reap HUGE profits from your £9 a month - i.e not converting to content, wouldnt it be great if they were far less greedy and the Sub came down to say £5 to reflect the amount ot content they provided and the age of the game?  Its value for money we are trying to quantify, not subjective opinion on type of content.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by steelwind

    The funniest thing is that it is the definition of insanity "repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting different results".

    That's not the definition of insantiy or even close. That is a bastardized version of a comment made by Albert Einstein.

     I always thought it was a bit silly myself as rarely is anything ever the same.

    The actions may be the same but the people may be different, you may be different, attitutudes and culture may be different...

    edit - and I think the actual quote was "repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"

     

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    He was refering to researchers repeating the same experiments the same way and expecting the result to be different.

     

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,293Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by VengeSunsoar
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by steelwind

    The funniest thing is that it is the definition of insanity "repeating the same mistakes over and over expecting different results".

    That's not the definition of insantiy or even close. That is a bastardized version of a comment made by Albert Einstein.

     I always thought it was a bit silly myself as rarely is anything ever the same.

    The actions may be the same but the people may be different, you may be different, attitutudes and culture may be different...

    edit - and I think the actual quote was "repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results"

     

    Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    He was refering to researchers repeating the same experiments the same way and expecting the result to be different.

     

     That doesn't even make sense.

    Researchers are supposed to repeat experiements.  It's how results are verified.  They look to see if they are repeatable, or was it a one time shot or some other x-variable that wasn't addressed.  Or even fraud.

    Numerous experiments have been found to be falsified, wrong or missing some key element that wasn't addressed because others tried to repeat the experiment. 

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • KareliaKarelia HeraklionPosts: 668Member
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Originally posted by Manolios

     

    i preffer quality than quantiy when it comes to content.

    btw you know what wow (and other sub games) gives you that gw2 (or other b2p or f2p) dont? stable community. not good or bad, but stable. i m playing wow and i m in a guild that almost every day i see and chat with same ppl. almost same happens server wide. in my gw2 and tera guilds, every time i log in i see other ppl. many new joined, many left, many have days to log. i hate that.

    i love when i meet ppl i used to play with before some years ago. today i met again 2 kids i played back in BC. it was a nice feeling. i didnt play even a single hour. i just talk with them, just that.

    i like f2p, but in games i dont spent much of my time or much effort. if i want to play serious and competitive, i ll go to a sub game. at least me :)

      Content per £ paid has got nothing to do with the quality of person playing, just looks at wow general chat.  I am also in a good guild with lots of friendly people (Eve and GW2)  its all subjective, but whats not subjective is the amount of content - for e.g some would argue that GW2 fractals were not to their taste, or WOW raids, but the question is who gives greatest amount of content per £.

    Here is a thought, It is well known that Blizzard reap HUGE profits from your £9 a month - i.e not converting to content, wouldnt it be great if they were far less greedy and the Sub came down to say £5 to reflect the amount ot content they provided and the age of the game?  Its value for money we are trying to quantify, not subjective opinion on type of content.

     

    so it doesnt matter what the content is, as it is just MUCH? i dont share this but anyway.

    i m also in an eve corp (raiden alliance) but this is not f2p or b2p. its a sub game that you can pay it with in game gold (isk) if you are good to make them :)

    the point that i agree is the price of sub, not for wow, but for every mmo. i think 5$ a month in more than enough. anyway you pay the box 50-60$ and other services (char transfer, race/class change, name change etc + shop items like cosmetics, pets, mounts etc). if you add that an expansion comes almost once a year and costs around 35-45$, then i think 5$/month is good enough for them

  • BladestromBladestrom edinburghPosts: 4,941Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Manolios
    Originally posted by Bladestrom
    Originally posted by Manolios

     

    i preffer quality than quantiy when it comes to content.

    btw you know what wow (and other sub games) gives you that gw2 (or other b2p or f2p) dont? stable community. not good or bad, but stable. i m playing wow and i m in a guild that almost every day i see and chat with same ppl. almost same happens server wide. in my gw2 and tera guilds, every time i log in i see other ppl. many new joined, many left, many have days to log. i hate that.

    i love when i meet ppl i used to play with before some years ago. today i met again 2 kids i played back in BC. it was a nice feeling. i didnt play even a single hour. i just talk with them, just that.

    i like f2p, but in games i dont spent much of my time or much effort. if i want to play serious and competitive, i ll go to a sub game. at least me :)

      Content per £ paid has got nothing to do with the quality of person playing, just looks at wow general chat.  I am also in a good guild with lots of friendly people (Eve and GW2)  its all subjective, but whats not subjective is the amount of content - for e.g some would argue that GW2 fractals were not to their taste, or WOW raids, but the question is who gives greatest amount of content per £.

    Here is a thought, It is well known that Blizzard reap HUGE profits from your £9 a month - i.e not converting to content, wouldnt it be great if they were far less greedy and the Sub came down to say £5 to reflect the amount ot content they provided and the age of the game?  Its value for money we are trying to quantify, not subjective opinion on type of content.

     

    so it doesnt matter what the content is, as it is just MUCH? i dont share this but anyway.

    i m also in an eve corp (raiden alliance) but this is not f2p or b2p. its a sub game that you can pay it with in game gold (isk) if you are good to make them :)

    the point that i agree is the price of sub, not for wow, but for every mmo. i think 5$ a month in more than enough. anyway you pay the box 50-60$ and other services (char transfer, race/class change, name change etc + shop items like cosmetics, pets, mounts etc). if you add that an expansion comes almost once a year and costs around 35-45$, then i think 5$/month is good enough for them

     yup agreed. Value for money is what its about, wether its sub or cash shop doesnt actually matter, its just a vehicle for getting your money to the owner of the game.  What is bad is 1) a cash shop that is manipulative, i.e pay to win ur must pay to access normal content, or 2) a sub that is excessive.

    rpg/mmorg history: Dun Darach>Bloodwych>Bards Tale 1-3>Eye of the beholder > Might and Magic 2,3,5 > FFVII> Baldur's Gate 1, 2 > Planescape Torment >Morrowind > WOW > oblivion > LOTR > Guild Wars (1900hrs elementalist) Vanguard. > GW2(1000 elementalist), Wildstar

    Now playing GW2, AOW 3, ESO, LOTR, Elite D

  • GreenHellGreenHell ludlow, MAPosts: 1,322Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vesavius
    Originally posted by bcbully

    Sub is just fine.

     

    B2P is evil. Anything with a 60$ upfront fee is evil. 

     

    Free is to intrusive.

     

    I agree with all this BC.

    Free client, 1-2 week full access trial, then sub (with no cash shop) is my ideal.

    This.

  • WaterlilyWaterlily parisPosts: 2,973Member Uncommon

    Companies are so disrespectful to gamers, can't believe EA pretends like gamers who don't want F2P don't exist or are a minority without even having done a study about it.

    Screw EA and screw microtransactions.

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon

    Still not interted in F2P. It equals more hackers, more gold farmers, and terrible community.


    A friend of a friend once told me, "if you lie long enough; it becomes truth." This is the case with F2P. Companies bost millions of subscribers when in fact most of those are just checking out the free trial.


    It's true what another posted that for crap games, F2P + marketing is the way to go because you will always pull in a few suckers.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • GolelornGolelorn Hiding From Social Media Peeping Toms, ALPosts: 1,099Member Uncommon

    WoW dwarves any f2p in terms of revenues. 

     

    Also, f2p is not sub. Something that SWTOR tries to get out of its players. So, I'm really confused.

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,498Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    Companies are so disrespectful to gamers, can't believe EA pretends like gamers who don't want F2P don't exist or are a minority without even having done a study about it.

    Screw EA and screw microtransactions.

    That's what was crazy about the article to me. He's being so dismissive of the people that prefer to pay a flat fee for a game. He spins it to make them sound like dinosaurs that are irrelavent because there is a new king in town.

     

    It may be true that you can't please all the people all the time, but why enrage some of the people for no reason?

  • WaterlilyWaterlily parisPosts: 2,973Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Golelorn

    WoW dwarves any f2p in terms of revenues. 

     

    Also, f2p is not sub. Something that SWTOR tries to get out of its players. So, I'm really confused.

    And Rift is successful too.

    Hell, the two most successful MMO out right now are probably Rift and WoW (LoL isn't an MMO), and both are P2P.

    I guess those 10 million WoW players are just a, and I quote: "Vocal minority"

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by Arclan

    Still not interted in F2P. It equals more hackers, more gold farmers, and terrible community.


    A friend of a friend once told me, "if you lie long enough; it becomes truth." This is the case with F2P. Companies bost millions of subscribers when in fact most of those are just checking out the free trial.


     

    Funny that you say f2p has more gold farmers and then say lie long enough and it becomes true. How long have you been saying that ?

    most cash shops can do away with gold farmers because the farmers can't make money under that system. Why buy gold from a farmer when you can just buy cash shop items and sell them for gold. But keep saying it and it will become true one day apparently.

  • YalexyYalexy BerlinPosts: 1,052Member Uncommon

    Not sure if this guy in the interview is serious...

    It's more like, that people don't have any money to waste on bad games.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    F2P earns more right now. That's just fact. Whether it appeals to a particular person is another issue and not relevant to the point in hand.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • GreenHellGreenHell ludlow, MAPosts: 1,322Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jpnz
    F2P earns more right now. That's just fact. Whether it appeals to a particular person is another issue and not relevant to the point in hand.

    What information do you have that proves this as a fact? I don't think you can use a game that was not good enough to hold its subscribers as a fact that F2P earns more.

  • DamonVileDamonVile Vancouver, BCPosts: 4,818Member
    Originally posted by GreenHell
    Originally posted by jpnz
    F2P earns more right now. That's just fact. Whether it appeals to a particular person is another issue and not relevant to the point in hand.

    What information do you have that proves this as a fact? I don't think you can use a game that was not good enough to hold its subscribers as a fact that F2P earns more.

    There was a thread here last month some time that showed the earnings of p2p and f2p games ( well a link to it ). f2p had a slight advantage but considering the number of them and the number of people it's not really something I'd want to say f2p makes more money. It was pretty subjective info imo

     

  • AeliousAelious Portland, ORPosts: 2,849Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by GreenHell
    Originally posted by jpnz
    F2P earns more right now. That's just fact. Whether it appeals to a particular person is another issue and not relevant to the point in hand.

    What information do you have that proves this as a fact? I don't think you can use a game that was not good enough to hold its subscribers as a fact that F2P earns more.

    There was a thread here last month some time that showed the earnings of p2p and f2p games ( well a link to it ). f2p had a slight advantage but considering the number of them and the number of people it's not really something I'd want to say f2p makes more money. It was pretty subjective info imo

     

    If it's the estimates I'm thinking of it only has data from '09-'12 and estimates up for '13-'15.  In '12 it was 50/50 between $ for P2P and F2P but also showed that x6 the players were playing F2P.  Needing 6 F2P players to equal the revenue of 1 P2P player doesn't seem like a good deal but I'm not signing developer checks so what do I know?

  • KaosProphetKaosProphet Edmonton, ABPosts: 379Member
    Originally posted by steelwind

    New content?! That is completely laughable! Considering the great majority of the "new content" is for the most part temporary and taken away when the event is over. By definition, this new content is nothing but mini-games and the lack of true perminant content is the true issue.

    Most MMO content is obsolete for the core subscriber base within a month or two anyway.  What purpose does keeping it around past that point really have, compared to replacing it with something fresh for both the vets and the late arrivals to enjoy together?

    I mean, other than to act as a 'gate' to the current crop of content, and thereby maintain the hierarchy of "vets pissing on neophytes."  Because that's a purpose I'm not really fond of in general.

    In regards to funneling, how is magic find working out for you, why does that even exist? Well imho it exists because GW2 loot tables are constantly balanced to keep the cash shop profitable. Any game where I wonder, would I be spending 100's of hours farming this stupid skin if this game was p2p?

    You probably would, in most cases.  Even without a cash-shop, endless-farming is the easiest method of extending content-lifespan and keep the subscribers paying their sub-fees. 

  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,224Member Uncommon

    I see an industry so desperate to get more "blood," that they are willing to go to extremes to get more people hooked on their failing concepts.

    Free to play is all about turning casuals into hardcore junkies.  And don't let the PR fool you, this industry--like the casino industry--lives on the hardcore junkies.  It lives on the hardcore roleplayers and immersion junkies, the hardcore levellers and achievers.  They have items in the item store to cater to all these types (powerups, costumes, emotes).  But what they want is for you to lose it, and lose it in splurges.

    But in order to root out a hardcore junkie, you have to first give away a "sample" to the curious.  You cater to their subconscious levers.  You make it easy for the ones with low impulse control to spend more than they ought.  And then, when there are no more new junkies to find, you close down, blow the game up, and start up another MMO that works the psychological angles better than the earlier one.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • tupodawg999tupodawg999 LondonPosts: 723Member Uncommon
    The market has spoken very loudly that the subscriber model is the model they like for the number one game (maybe the number one in each of a few genres) and F2P for the rest.
  • TehTicTehTic Colorado Springs, COPosts: 34Member
    From my understanding he is speaking on mobile games.
  • JemcrystalJemcrystal Champaign, ILPosts: 1,548Member Uncommon

    I prefer f2p if it is done right.  Not all of us were born rich.  But many f2p's are more expensive than sub/box because they're getting greedy.  F2p done right is about many options and a large variety showing in a game with a sizable window for those with no money to play and advance along with people who can pay.

     

    You anti-f2p peeps should check yourselves.  You make free sound evil.  I bet you use free file storage services and gank pictures, movies, and music from the internet.  Yet you bitch about games having a free avenue for the public - AND THEIRS WAS LEGAL.

     

    EA did good with Sims 2 but I don't play anything else they have supported since.  They lost something along the way and everyone is mad at them for it.  Or maybe they never had it.  Maybe Maxis had it and EA just had the greedy compulsion to sell it.


  • TheKrautTheKraut Tampa, FLPosts: 48Member

    It's not that people prefer F2P. Its that with all the garbage being produced, people want to pay what they think the game is worth.

    Bring a 'new' EQ or game with depth back, I guarantee people will pay a monthly sub for it.

    image
Sign In or Register to comment.