I don't understand how everyone knows that Wildstar will be a bad enough game that it WILL go F2P. It's not like F2P is where the money is at. Guild Wars 2 is bringing in significantly less revenue quarter after quarter and it doesn't really show signs of going back up. A great game will easily succeed with a sub model. $15 monthly is not much of a barrier to entry and if you really can't afford that, hopefully you have enough time to farm out in game cash to buy your sub that way.
F2P is not "the future of the industry". F2P is the future (and present) of mediocre games that can't support a decent player base while charging a sub. NCSoft is publishing Wildstar. I'm pretty sure they are aware of the advantages/disadvantages of the B2P or F2P model. Why? Because they have other games that offer those models and if you refuse to pay a sub, you can always play those other games.
i knew it all along from all the bullshit talk from the executives
and their big "talk up" of how much it cost to produce this mmo, hilarious, all f2p games have similar development funds, just NCsoft knows full well in advance that western audiences are dumb enough to throw down 60 bucks on a whim.
good luck with your failed mmo, the leaked beta footage shows for itself, its going to fail and nobody will miss it
Kudos to them for going sub, hope the do well, thats two big name MMO's now that announced subs, I'll be playing FFXIV: ARR myself as i don't really care for the wildstar look, and I will never play another game that has anything to do with NCsoft, but I hope Carbine does well.
Originally posted by observer I'm surprised some of you are praising the subscription model. You're deluding yourselves if you think a sub. game gives more quality. Tell me this, how many mmos have you quit within the first mmo of trying them out? Did you complain about end-game? If so, shouldn't the subscription model provide the quality for end-game? Exactly.
The delusion comes from those who expect something for nothing. A steady revenue stream helps the company project its needs into the future, and thus allows better content generation. Notice I said *allows*, not mandates. Yoshi P made a very compelling argument in favor of subscriptions.
As for the other, if you have nothing invested in a game, its a lot easier to just leave and chase after the next F2P shiny that comes along (and the next, and the next, and the next...). But given the current ADD generation and its well known short attention span, and thus low skill ceiling, thats only to be expected. But lets not encourage such antics, when it can be avoided.
Wild Star isn't going for a steady revenue stream. They are trying to go for a cash grab.
a B2P boxed fee
a P2P subscription Fee
a real money transaction option
Talk about double dipping.
They probably know all to well, they can't sustain that indefinitely. and will alter the boxed fee or the sub fee or implement a Cash Shop at some point.
If this game turns out to have an awesome endgame, I'd be willing to pay the $60, I'd pay the $15/mo. But I pull the breaks on RMT.
Cash grab? You do realize that the major reason for this exercise is to make a profit on the MASSIVE investment, that these games cost to create? They are simply using what until recent years had been the traditional western business model. The addition of the CREDD is to shoot the gold sellers in the wallet. It provides those who have little patience with a safer in game method of gaining in game currency.
That does several things. One, it cuts down on the number of accounts that get subverted by people visiting dodgy sites, and also makes it less profitable for gold sellers. That also keeps the staff time/talent required to deal with related customers complaints down.
As for the other, no one is forcing you (or anyone else) to use the RMT system. But it does address the reality that most such companies face, in regards to the farming and selling of in game currency.
11 pages of discussion so far on a post that basically said "Wildstar will require a subscription."
I love it.
No discussion necessary as far as I'm concerned. My interest in the game may have fallen away, but it will be B2P one day, that's almost a guarantee. I'll give it a shot then. I commend them on no cash shops, though.
Sounds good, it remains to be seen what can be obtained via CREDD though. Subscription model is definitely the way to go imo, give me a good game without the option to pay for power/advancement and I'll gladly pay a subscription.
Originally posted by observer I'm surprised some of you are praising the subscription model. You're deluding yourselves if you think a sub. game gives more quality. Tell me this, how many mmos have you quit within the first mmo of trying them out? Did you complain about end-game? If so, shouldn't the subscription model provide the quality for end-game? Exactly.
The delusion comes from those who expect something for nothing. A steady revenue stream helps the company project its needs into the future, and thus allows better content generation. Notice I said *allows*, not mandates. Yoshi P made a very compelling argument in favor of subscriptions.
As for the other, if you have nothing invested in a game, its a lot easier to just leave and chase after the next F2P shiny that comes along (and the next, and the next, and the next...). But given the current ADD generation and its well known short attention span, and thus low skill ceiling, thats only to be expected. But lets not encourage such antics, when it can be avoided.
Wild Star isn't going for a steady revenue stream. They are trying to go for a cash grab.
a B2P boxed fee
a P2P subscription Fee
a real money transaction option
Talk about double dipping.
They probably know all to well, they can't sustain that indefinitely. and will alter the boxed fee or the sub fee or implement a Cash Shop at some point.
If this game turns out to have an awesome endgame, I'd be willing to pay the $60, I'd pay the $15/mo. But I pull the breaks on RMT.
Cash grab? You do realize that the major reason for this exercise is to make a profit on the MASSIVE investment, that these games cost to create? They are simply using what until recent years had been the traditional western business model. The addition of the CREDD is to shoot the gold sellers in the wallet. It provides those who have little patience with a safer in game method of gaining in game currency.
That does several things. One, it cuts down on the number of accounts that get subverted by people visiting dodgy sites, and also makes it less profitable for gold sellers. That also keeps the staff time/talent required to deal with related customers complaints down.
As for the other, no one is forcing you (or anyone else) to use the RMT system. But it does address the reality that most such companies face, in regards to the farming and selling of in game currency.
Any 2 of those three options would still require a high quality game. But all three in one? What is this game on the level of?
Come on! It's an unknown game from an unknown developer from a known publisher.
I'd pay the 60 bucks and the sub if they dropped the RMT. But again, all 3 in one game. Funcom tried that.
I applaud the payment model even though I will not be playing it. I have zero interest in WS. That would not change even if they offered the game "for free". To those that feel it will be a great game....good luck and hope it pans out for you.
Glad to see a game with as much hype as WildStar coming out with a sub based revenue model. I've always been one to play a game and pay for whatever, as long as the game's fun. I won't be playing the game right away, as it's kinda themeparky and I'm all themeparked out, but I wish the game and its followers/player base good luck.
May the game and its subscription last for years upon years.
Originally posted by observer I'm surprised some of you are praising the subscription model. You're deluding yourselves if you think a sub. game gives more quality. Tell me this, how many mmos have you quit within the first mmo of trying them out? Did you complain about end-game? If so, shouldn't the subscription model provide the quality for end-game? Exactly.
The delusion comes from those who expect something for nothing. A steady revenue stream helps the company project its needs into the future, and thus allows better content generation. Notice I said *allows*, not mandates. Yoshi P made a very compelling argument in favor of subscriptions.
As for the other, if you have nothing invested in a game, its a lot easier to just leave and chase after the next F2P shiny that comes along (and the next, and the next, and the next...). But given the current ADD generation and its well known short attention span, and thus low skill ceiling, thats only to be expected. But lets not encourage such antics, when it can be avoided.
Wild Star isn't going for a steady revenue stream. They are trying to go for a cash grab.
a B2P boxed fee
a P2P subscription Fee
a real money transaction option
Talk about double dipping.
They probably know all to well, they can't sustain that indefinitely. and will alter the boxed fee or the sub fee or implement a Cash Shop at some point.
If this game turns out to have an awesome endgame, I'd be willing to pay the $60, I'd pay the $15/mo. But I pull the breaks on RMT.
Cash grab? You do realize that the major reason for this exercise is to make a profit on the MASSIVE investment, that these games cost to create? They are simply using what until recent years had been the traditional western business model. The addition of the CREDD is to shoot the gold sellers in the wallet. It provides those who have little patience with a safer in game method of gaining in game currency.
That does several things. One, it cuts down on the number of accounts that get subverted by people visiting dodgy sites, and also makes it less profitable for gold sellers. That also keeps the staff time/talent required to deal with related customers complaints down.
As for the other, no one is forcing you (or anyone else) to use the RMT system. But it does address the reality that most such companies face, in regards to the farming and selling of in game currency.
Any 2 of those three options would still require a high quality game. But all three in one? What is this game on the level of?
Come on! It's an unknown game from an unknown developer from a known publisher.
I'd pay the 60 bucks and the sub if they dropped the RMT. But again, all 3 in one game. Funcom tried that.
Fortunately, this isn't Funcom... I'm PAINFULLY aware of Funcoms limitations... But as I stated, you aren't required to use the RMT. If its not your type of game, perhaps you can find another that suits your taste. To each their own.
While I think a hybrid model like Rift or SWTOR is the way to go, there sure are a lot of sour grapes in this thread. "Pfft, I didn't want to play it anyway!". Yeah, right. If a sub can keep a good portion of the entitled, whiny man child population away, then I'm all for it.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
Originally posted by observer I'm surprised some of you are praising the subscription model. You're deluding yourselves if you think a sub. game gives more quality. Tell me this, how many mmos have you quit within the first mmo of trying them out? Did you complain about end-game? If so, shouldn't the subscription model provide the quality for end-game? Exactly.
The delusion comes from those who expect something for nothing. A steady revenue stream helps the company project its needs into the future, and thus allows better content generation. Notice I said *allows*, not mandates. Yoshi P made a very compelling argument in favor of subscriptions.
As for the other, if you have nothing invested in a game, its a lot easier to just leave and chase after the next F2P shiny that comes along (and the next, and the next, and the next...). But given the current ADD generation and its well known short attention span, and thus low skill ceiling, thats only to be expected. But lets not encourage such antics, when it can be avoided.
Wild Star isn't going for a steady revenue stream. They are trying to go for a cash grab.
a B2P boxed fee
a P2P subscription Fee
a real money transaction option
Talk about double dipping.
They probably know all to well, they can't sustain that indefinitely. and will alter the boxed fee or the sub fee or implement a Cash Shop at some point.
If this game turns out to have an awesome endgame, I'd be willing to pay the $60, I'd pay the $15/mo. But I pull the breaks on RMT.
Cash grab? You do realize that the major reason for this exercise is to make a profit on the MASSIVE investment, that these games cost to create? They are simply using what until recent years had been the traditional western business model. The addition of the CREDD is to shoot the gold sellers in the wallet. It provides those who have little patience with a safer in game method of gaining in game currency.
That does several things. One, it cuts down on the number of accounts that get subverted by people visiting dodgy sites, and also makes it less profitable for gold sellers. That also keeps the staff time/talent required to deal with related customers complaints down.
As for the other, no one is forcing you (or anyone else) to use the RMT system. But it does address the reality that most such companies face, in regards to the farming and selling of in game currency.
Any 2 of those three options would still require a high quality game. But all three in one? What is this game on the level of?
Come on! It's an unknown game from an unknown developer from a known publisher.
I'd pay the 60 bucks and the sub if they dropped the RMT. But again, all 3 in one game. Funcom tried that.
Fortunately, this isn't Funcom... I'm PAINFULLY aware of Funcoms limitations... But as I stated, you aren't required to use the RMT. If its not your type of game, perhaps you can find another that suits your taste. To each their own.
But it's not about me being required to use it. It's about everyone else who uses it fckng up the economy
I prefer the subscription model. It offers a complete service that is ad free. Leaving players free to immerse themselves in the game without distractions.
It also brings about more committed players, and I think the PLEX-like dynamic worked well enough for EVE, which has a very strong economy. Aside from discouraging "gold-sellers", it also encourages player time input for those who got the time and not the money (unlike me sadly)
If you are really dedicated, you can play for free. If not, you can pay a subscription and be assured that there won't be cash shop.
I also expect that having loads of gold won't even remotely be pay to win. Like WoW, probably you'll be able to get pre-raid epic items that are being auctioned, silly mounts/pets or even large loads of material purchases to save profession levelling time, but nothing game breaking.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
When I see models like these it saddens me. Subscription based is my favorite revenue model but when you start allowing people to sell something they purchased with real life cash in game, it really ruins it for me.
Originally posted by BillMurphy I'm surprised there's so little talk about the 2014 release date delay...
Are you trolling your own thread? Like any game player is surprised at a release date being pushed back. We would be more concerned if they claimed to be right on track for an "early release" and all the BS that typically entails from unfinished features to oh so glorious chains of bugs. *Stares at BM.*
I am ok with the game offering a subscription option for those who prefer that mode. I am happy that its not Free to Play. But i am VERY disappointed that they opted for a CREDD / Plex / Chronoscrolls instead of a B2P option like its sister company (Anet) did. I was very much looking to play this game but i wont pay a sub for it. Im sure ill buy the game and play the free month. That should be enough to get my moneys worth. They could have used the GW2 model and offer a lot more stuff to subscribers.
I can see the CREDDs selling for an amount of in game money that i will never get so.... sadly, ill pass on this game after the first free month is up. At least both WS and GW2 are part of NCSOFT so by sticking to GW2 instead ill still be supporting the same parent company.
This is a terrible model. I might still push through with buying the game as I had intended long before, but this news greatly disappoints me.
The advantage of P2P over F2P for the players is the sense of equality - everyone who pays the sub price are offered the same things with no advantage given to anyone. Adding CREDD destroys this equality.
CREDD contains the cons of F2P games - those who buy CREDD for $$ and sell in-game for gold creates an advantage for those players who can afford it. This officially promotes imbalance between those willing to pay extra $$ for gold.
Comments
I don't understand how everyone knows that Wildstar will be a bad enough game that it WILL go F2P. It's not like F2P is where the money is at. Guild Wars 2 is bringing in significantly less revenue quarter after quarter and it doesn't really show signs of going back up. A great game will easily succeed with a sub model. $15 monthly is not much of a barrier to entry and if you really can't afford that, hopefully you have enough time to farm out in game cash to buy your sub that way.
F2P is not "the future of the industry". F2P is the future (and present) of mediocre games that can't support a decent player base while charging a sub. NCSoft is publishing Wildstar. I'm pretty sure they are aware of the advantages/disadvantages of the B2P or F2P model. Why? Because they have other games that offer those models and if you refuse to pay a sub, you can always play those other games.
i was right, lol
i knew it all along from all the bullshit talk from the executives
and their big "talk up" of how much it cost to produce this mmo, hilarious, all f2p games have similar development funds, just NCsoft knows full well in advance that western audiences are dumb enough to throw down 60 bucks on a whim.
good luck with your failed mmo, the leaked beta footage shows for itself, its going to fail and nobody will miss it
This alone would want me to pick up this game.
Thank you for this type of subscription model.
Ratero.
<InvalidTag type="text/javascript" src="http://www.gamebreaker.tv/cce/e.js"></script><div class="cce_pane" content-slug="which-world-of-warcraft-villain-are-you" ctype="quiz" d="http://www.gamebreaker.tv"></div>;
Cash grab? You do realize that the major reason for this exercise is to make a profit on the MASSIVE investment, that these games cost to create? They are simply using what until recent years had been the traditional western business model. The addition of the CREDD is to shoot the gold sellers in the wallet. It provides those who have little patience with a safer in game method of gaining in game currency.
That does several things. One, it cuts down on the number of accounts that get subverted by people visiting dodgy sites, and also makes it less profitable for gold sellers. That also keeps the staff time/talent required to deal with related customers complaints down.
As for the other, no one is forcing you (or anyone else) to use the RMT system. But it does address the reality that most such companies face, in regards to the farming and selling of in game currency.
I dont know about that.. f2p players will be farming our gold because of CREDD.
No discussion necessary as far as I'm concerned. My interest in the game may have fallen away, but it will be B2P one day, that's almost a guarantee. I'll give it a shot then. I commend them on no cash shops, though.
Any 2 of those three options would still require a high quality game. But all three in one? What is this game on the level of?
Come on! It's an unknown game from an unknown developer from a known publisher.
I'd pay the 60 bucks and the sub if they dropped the RMT. But again, all 3 in one game. Funcom tried that.
I applaud the payment model even though I will not be playing it. I have zero interest in WS. That would not change even if they offered the game "for free". To those that feel it will be a great game....good luck and hope it pans out for you.
Let's party like it is 1863!
Glad to see a game with as much hype as WildStar coming out with a sub based revenue model. I've always been one to play a game and pay for whatever, as long as the game's fun. I won't be playing the game right away, as it's kinda themeparky and I'm all themeparked out, but I wish the game and its followers/player base good luck.
May the game and its subscription last for years upon years.
Fortunately, this isn't Funcom... I'm PAINFULLY aware of Funcoms limitations... But as I stated, you aren't required to use the RMT. If its not your type of game, perhaps you can find another that suits your taste. To each their own.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
It may be but we won't know until we can see what kind of advantage having a lot of gold gives you in game.
Could be negligible and just convenient or it could be major,we have no information to make any claim.
But it's not about me being required to use it. It's about everyone else who uses it fckng up the economy
I think this is great news.
I prefer the subscription model. It offers a complete service that is ad free. Leaving players free to immerse themselves in the game without distractions.
It also brings about more committed players, and I think the PLEX-like dynamic worked well enough for EVE, which has a very strong economy. Aside from discouraging "gold-sellers", it also encourages player time input for those who got the time and not the money (unlike me sadly)
Looking forward to this one!
Good news to me.
If you are really dedicated, you can play for free. If not, you can pay a subscription and be assured that there won't be cash shop.
I also expect that having loads of gold won't even remotely be pay to win. Like WoW, probably you'll be able to get pre-raid epic items that are being auctioned, silly mounts/pets or even large loads of material purchases to save profession levelling time, but nothing game breaking.
My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.
Safehouse Gaming up and running at: http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnKd0Hk85CQ_N04Ae7v5zZg
Are you trolling your own thread? Like any game player is surprised at a release date being pushed back. We would be more concerned if they claimed to be right on track for an "early release" and all the BS that typically entails from unfinished features to oh so glorious chains of bugs. *Stares at BM.*
You playin in da forums man.
I am ok with the game offering a subscription option for those who prefer that mode. I am happy that its not Free to Play. But i am VERY disappointed that they opted for a CREDD / Plex / Chronoscrolls instead of a B2P option like its sister company (Anet) did. I was very much looking to play this game but i wont pay a sub for it. Im sure ill buy the game and play the free month. That should be enough to get my moneys worth. They could have used the GW2 model and offer a lot more stuff to subscribers.
I can see the CREDDs selling for an amount of in game money that i will never get so.... sadly, ill pass on this game after the first free month is up. At least both WS and GW2 are part of NCSOFT so by sticking to GW2 instead ill still be supporting the same parent company.
This is a terrible model. I might still push through with buying the game as I had intended long before, but this news greatly disappoints me.
The advantage of P2P over F2P for the players is the sense of equality - everyone who pays the sub price are offered the same things with no advantage given to anyone. Adding CREDD destroys this equality.
CREDD contains the cons of F2P games - those who buy CREDD for $$ and sell in-game for gold creates an advantage for those players who can afford it. This officially promotes imbalance between those willing to pay extra $$ for gold.