Originally posted by Cinge What the write fails to mention, is how many games "Release" f2p/b2p and how many are forced to because their game had a plethora of issues that had nothing to do with the sub cost.
Swotr's failure had nothing to do with it's sub cost, and everything to do with the game itself.
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
Originally posted by Cinge What the write fails to mention, is how many games "Release" f2p/b2p and how many are forced to because their game had a plethora of issues that had nothing to do with the sub cost.
Swotr's failure had nothing to do with it's sub cost, and everything to do with the game itself.
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
Originally posted by Cinge What the write fails to mention, is how many games "Release" f2p/b2p and how many are forced to because their game had a plethora of issues that had nothing to do with the sub cost.
Swotr's failure had nothing to do with it's sub cost, and everything to do with the game itself.
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
There's a lot of truth in what you say. But look at WoW. The most successful subscription game, and even Blizzard has a tough time turning out quality content in a timely manner. And if Blizzard has difficulty, with the insane revenue it rakes in, then I don't know any game company that can actually meet the demands of players.
Originally posted by Cinge What the write fails to mention, is how many games "Release" f2p/b2p and how many are forced to because their game had a plethora of issues that had nothing to do with the sub cost.
Swotr's failure had nothing to do with it's sub cost, and everything to do with the game itself.
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
There's a lot of truth in what you say. But look at WoW. The most successful subscription game, and even Blizzard has a tough time turning out quality content in a timely manner. And if Blizzard has difficulty, with the insane revenue it rakes in, then I don't know any game company that can actually meet the demands of players.
While WoW does have quite a few issues, things to do is not one of them. Their content patches may be released a few months apart, but the content in them takes months to do.
This isnt personal to the person I quoted, but i get the sense that many people dont truly grasp how much endgame content there actually is in WoW. Many times when someone points this out, others come in with the "well its 10 years old, dont compare it". At this point of the current expansion (MoP, which released in Sept of 2012), there are 33 brand new raid bosses alone. Thats not counding all the scenerios bosses, heroic scnerio bosses, and heroic dungon bosses, new professions and quests/events, pet battles, new PVP battlegrounds and arenas etc. Everything I just listed has been in the game for less than a year, its all form MoP. if you want to discuss "quality", Method stated in ther world firt clear of the lastest tier, that its prob been Blizzards best one yet. In a few weeks, there will be a whole new tier with another 13 bosses, bringing the new MoP level 90 endgame boss count to 46.....thats 46 raid bosses...and these arnt simple tank and spank fights...there are fights that take top guilds raiding 16+ hours a day months to clear..... Once again, thats not even counting the countless other new content and activites for levle 90s to do, all developed in Mists of Pandaria...
Im not saying the game has to have raids, but if a game has a wealth of challenigng content to where it takes most hardcore guilds months to conquer, then it will keep its subscriptions. The sad thing is though....i agree with the sentiment that a game like ESO will prob end up abandoning its P2P model...though not because "P2P is dead", but because what iv seen so far, its endgame doesnt seem to be worth 15/month.
Originally posted by Cinge What the write fails to mention, is how many games "Release" f2p/b2p and how many are forced to because their game had a plethora of issues that had nothing to do with the sub cost.
Swotr's failure had nothing to do with it's sub cost, and everything to do with the game itself.
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
There's a lot of truth in what you say. But look at WoW. The most successful subscription game, and even Blizzard has a tough time turning out quality content in a timely manner. And if Blizzard has difficulty, with the insane revenue it rakes in, then I don't know any game company that can actually meet the demands of players.
Well, that's the point. Bigger MMO companies are busy trying to stay safe and reproduce what worked in the past, instead of keeping in touch with the evolution of MMO players' interests and expectations.
That's why I believe that true change will most likely come from indie MMO companies which are run by MMO players who are trying to express what they want through what they make. If their games ultimately prove to be successful, then the bigger MMO companies will see what they do as a safe, profitable investment and follow suit. After all, if anything, bigger MMO companies at least know how to copy other people's good ideas.
Until then, I expect that the B2P/F2P + microtransaction models will stick around and dissatisfied people will continue to zealously support them. But, at the very least, I hope that TESO proves to be an exception here.
Waiting for:Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on:www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
The idea of playing an MMO thats only real difference is repeatable endgame content that I have to pay to repeat has never been ideal to me. It's a scam. Until they give people something to play that has a more varied endgame than pretty much anything out or coming out, I'm not going to gleefully throw money to rent a broken record I already paid the box price for.
I am so sick of these F2P gamers and their I have nothing risked or invested so I have nothing to lose attitude.
99% of F2P gamers are just a totally and completely negative force on gaming communities.
They lie, cheat, steal, exploit, gold spam, and go out of their way to be a destructive influence on anything positive.
There are enough RUINED F2P games out there for them that they can stay with those games and keep making those communities miserable.
I guess now isn't the time to tell you how many of every type of person you listed I met in WoW and other sub games, huh? Probably not.
Your point is really, really shaky at best, crumbling on itself at worst.
But hey, nice generalization that attacks a fair amount of legitimate players who just want to have fun. The irony is you not seeing how negative you're being.
The console guys from whom they expect to get extra cash have to pay 60$ per month to play online(xbox live/psngold) plus 180 per month for the game plus 50-60 $ for the game box.
So it's 290-300 $.
Sorry it's not going to happen and it wont last long.
10 people play a P2P MMO, they all pay $15 = $150.
10 people play a F2P MMO, 7 of them never spend anything 3 of them end up paying $50 each. = $150
You simply CANT have all 10 people pay $0....then there wouldnt be a game.
Either way, the bills MUST BE PAID. For those 7 people, sounds like a great deal why wouldnt it !!! For the other 3 they pay way more than $15.
This is why we support P2P. $15 for EVERYTHING....or $50 for a COUPLE cash shop items....
Its a no brainer.
I have said this since the F2P model first came about.
What I totally hate about F2P is that it mirrors real life.
Those of us that have a job, work hard, and provide for ourselves, are having to pay more than out fair share so that a bunch of rude ungrateful arrogant entitled generation can have a quality product for free.
You want a new quality game then pay your own damn way, Im sick of paying for you.
I don't see pure f2p as anything worth much at all. The successful ones are mostly hybrid models, where people who pay subs get to use the freebie players as additional content. Remove the subs money and those games fall into obsolescence quickly - the f2p part is just to populate the world with unscripted NPC's, sort of. The other games rely on the so-called 'whales', and can only do so as long as said whales are available and willing to play and pay for everyone else to play, too...which isn't something I would consider to be infinitely sustainable. Top it off with the poor customer service many f2p's have and imo it becomes clear that the actual solution is that p2p games have to be more aggressive in putting out content. No one wants to pay to keep repeating content; the problem with that statement isn't the 'pay' part...its the 'repeating content' part.
Non-repetitive content, good-to-great customer service, and aggressive design concepts will make a game that many will pay for. Shoddy design, poorly-implemented subsystems and repetitive grinding is the reason f2p ever even got a -chance- to become popular in the first place.
The console guys from whom they expect to get extra cash have to pay 60$ per month to play online(xbox live/psngold) plus 180 per month for the game plus 50-60 $ for the game box.
So it's 290-300 $.
Sorry it's not going to happen and it wont last long.
First...did you mean per year? I think you did.
Second...if they're guaranteed to not want to pay more, and there are plenty of f2p players on PC alone, then why would any publisher want to go out of their way to further populate their servers with guaranteed non-sales? Your argument doesn't make a case against subs, it makes a case against including console players -at all-. Now, I don't see console players that way...but that -is- what you're arguing.
I am so sick of these F2P gamers and their I have nothing risked or invested so I have nothing to lose attitude.
99% of F2P gamers are just a totally and completely negative force on gaming communities.
They lie, cheat, steal, exploit, gold spam, and go out of their way to be a destructive influence on anything positive.
There are enough RUINED F2P games out there for them that they can stay with those games and keep making those communities miserable.
I guess now isn't the time to tell you how many of every type of person you listed I met in WoW and other sub games, huh? Probably not.
Your point is really, really shaky at best, crumbling on itself at worst.
But hey, nice generalization that attacks a fair amount of legitimate players who just want to have fun. The irony is you not seeing how negative you're being.
At least I'm not the only person who sees the irony in that post. I wonder when I see these sorts of posts if these people really think they so much better than everyone else. How can people who spew such hate claim the moral high ground?
Nothing keeps retards out of game, even if the sub was 1000$ a month, you would still have retards.
With that said, if the game in question had content that required a lenthly coordinated effort to conquer, its a huge asset to have the same group of people working on the progression together. Having players hop in and hop out on a whim kind of goes agaisnt that "guild spirit" MMOs should be creating. Half the fun I used to have in WoW was seeing my guild's name as number 3 on our server on wowprogress.
Which goes back to the point of if the endgame content is there (not saying it has to be raids, im just using tha as an example), people will pay for the sub.
10 people play a P2P MMO, they all pay $15 = $150.
10 people play a F2P MMO, 7 of them never spend anything 3 of them end up paying $50 each. = $150
You simply CANT have all 10 people pay $0....then there wouldnt be a game.
Either way, the bills MUST BE PAID. For those 7 people, sounds like a great deal why wouldnt it !!! For the other 3 they pay way more than $15.
This is why we support P2P. $15 for EVERYTHING....or $50 for a COUPLE cash shop items....
Its a no brainer.
I have said this since the F2P model first came about.
What I totally hate about F2P is that it mirrors real life.
Those of us that have a job, work hard, and provide for ourselves, are having to pay more than out fair share so that a bunch of rude ungrateful arrogant entitled generation can have a quality product for free.
You want a new quality game then pay your own damn way, Im sick of paying for you.
That analysis is wrong as I've pointed out in another post. As for your rage, it's borderline paranoia. A subscription game is no more likely to have 'hard working' players than a f2p game. Sub games could easily have those on disability who may not be able to work, or trust fund babies, or unemployed.
What I'm tired of is my subscription dollars subsidizing your 40+ hour a week game addiction when I myself only play 2 to 3 hours per week.
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy? Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
Nice one! But I still don't like you because you are against CREED ...
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy? Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
Originally posted by BrooksTech Happy to pay a sub fee for a good game.
I am happy to pay a sub fee for a good game too.
there just arent any, ESO, Wildstar will join the list of SWTor, Tera, and RIFT, nice try but next.
RIFT offers more than all of these games combined features, and its free, and I dont have to pay for anything if I dont want, but hey I just bought 50$ of cash store currency to support RIFT's system, I like it.
I have been playing since f2p so about same as if I subbed, but when I sub, I feel like I have to play, now I play when I want to play.
I will likely spend the same amount anyways, and a smart buyer can double up on purchases when they have deals
Nice one! But I still don't like you because you are against CREED ...
OK, here's a compromise.
If in the 1st month or 2, Credd does not have a negative impact on the game's economy, and that CREDD is truly being used to subsidize time and not just a lame excuse for NCSoft to legitimize gold selling, I will retract what I said about it.
(But in every game I have played, this has not happened)
I'll be open minded. Otherwise, I'd be interested in a SciFi MMO.
Even though i have no interest in this game, i think this is great news for the mmo industry as a whole. Free to play models are the ruin of games in the long run. The communities in those F2P games are the worse. They are filled with the lowest kinds of people on the internet.
Originally posted by Gravarg I'm happy to see all these games going P2P. I can't stand F2P. I played them for about a year, but finally got fed up with all the nickel and diming. I'm P2P for life! I liked Rift, but left as soon as it went F2P. I just don't like the problems tha come with a F2P game.
so narrowminded, that is the problem with p2p people, which I was for years, until RIFT went free2play. Their model is flawless, and it doesnt have any problems what so ever with f2p
2 of these 3 games will be f2p within a yr of launch, FF14 has a loyal base, but it should be f2p as well, but they will keep it p2p. ESO and Wildstar especially will be hurting for players, 3-6 months after launch. Wildstar, wouldnt surpise me to see f2p within 6 months, its player base isnt gonna be that good, after the "free" 60$ month.
Ironic you use the world "narrowminded" Rift's model is NOT flawless....is there anything ...ANYTHING in the Cash Shop, Cash Shop only? Yes including so called "useless" vanity items like dyes, flavor armor etc?
Yes? Then its not flawless....I want the ENTIRE game for one low monthly fee. All the game...ALL the vanity items...everything !
This. The only way I can accept "vanity items" in the item mall is if the game has no focus on aesthetics. FFXIV has a such focus, so it is unacceptable for them to have such "vanity items" in item mall.
Comments
Agreed. A good quality MMO will draw people in and keep people's attention on the game itself, regardless of if it is based on the subscription model. But, as soon as the quality of the MMO in question falls or gets stale, then people will pick it apart, such as in criticizing its cost and how that cost is presented.
I always saw the general move towards B2P/F2P + microtransaction models as a sign that MMO companies were adapting to the fact that people were unhappy with the product and services which MMOs were offering at the time, not as a sign that MMOs were entering some kind of new age of enlightened business practices.
Now MMO companies have to deal with and clean up the fallout. And the fallout is that many people have gotten used to being unsatisfied with the product and services which MMOs offer, so their refusal to pay any subscription fees has taken a life of its own and is now an ingrained habit.
It's a real mess out there in the MMO industry--no doubt about it.
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
I couldn't have said it better myself, bravo.
There's a lot of truth in what you say. But look at WoW. The most successful subscription game, and even Blizzard has a tough time turning out quality content in a timely manner. And if Blizzard has difficulty, with the insane revenue it rakes in, then I don't know any game company that can actually meet the demands of players.
While WoW does have quite a few issues, things to do is not one of them. Their content patches may be released a few months apart, but the content in them takes months to do.
This isnt personal to the person I quoted, but i get the sense that many people dont truly grasp how much endgame content there actually is in WoW. Many times when someone points this out, others come in with the "well its 10 years old, dont compare it". At this point of the current expansion (MoP, which released in Sept of 2012), there are 33 brand new raid bosses alone. Thats not counding all the scenerios bosses, heroic scnerio bosses, and heroic dungon bosses, new professions and quests/events, pet battles, new PVP battlegrounds and arenas etc. Everything I just listed has been in the game for less than a year, its all form MoP. if you want to discuss "quality", Method stated in ther world firt clear of the lastest tier, that its prob been Blizzards best one yet. In a few weeks, there will be a whole new tier with another 13 bosses, bringing the new MoP level 90 endgame boss count to 46.....thats 46 raid bosses...and these arnt simple tank and spank fights...there are fights that take top guilds raiding 16+ hours a day months to clear..... Once again, thats not even counting the countless other new content and activites for levle 90s to do, all developed in Mists of Pandaria...
Im not saying the game has to have raids, but if a game has a wealth of challenigng content to where it takes most hardcore guilds months to conquer, then it will keep its subscriptions. The sad thing is though....i agree with the sentiment that a game like ESO will prob end up abandoning its P2P model...though not because "P2P is dead", but because what iv seen so far, its endgame doesnt seem to be worth 15/month.
That's why I believe that true change will most likely come from indie MMO companies which are run by MMO players who are trying to express what they want through what they make. If their games ultimately prove to be successful, then the bigger MMO companies will see what they do as a safe, profitable investment and follow suit. After all, if anything, bigger MMO companies at least know how to copy other people's good ideas.
Until then, I expect that the B2P/F2P + microtransaction models will stick around and dissatisfied people will continue to zealously support them. But, at the very least, I hope that TESO proves to be an exception here.
Waiting for: Citadel of Sorcery. Along the way, The Elder Scrolls Online (when it is F2P).
Keeping an eye on: www.play2crush.com (whatever is going on here).
Bill so many years so many crap games.
Subscription can survive only if the game is truly a masterpiece and that wont last long
Thank GOD!
I am so sick of these F2P gamers and their I have nothing risked or invested so I have nothing to lose attitude.
99% of F2P gamers are just a totally and completely negative force on gaming communities.
They lie, cheat, steal, exploit, gold spam, and go out of their way to be a destructive influence on anything positive.
There are enough RUINED F2P games out there for them that they can stay with those games and keep making those communities miserable.
I guess now isn't the time to tell you how many of every type of person you listed I met in WoW and other sub games, huh? Probably not.
Your point is really, really shaky at best, crumbling on itself at worst.
But hey, nice generalization that attacks a fair amount of legitimate players who just want to have fun. The irony is you not seeing how negative you're being.
Im on the pc side of players but
The console guys from whom they expect to get extra cash have to pay 60$ per month to play online(xbox live/psngold) plus 180 per month for the game plus 50-60 $ for the game box.
So it's 290-300 $.
Sorry it's not going to happen and it wont last long.
I have said this since the F2P model first came about.
What I totally hate about F2P is that it mirrors real life.
Those of us that have a job, work hard, and provide for ourselves, are having to pay more than out fair share so that a bunch of rude ungrateful arrogant entitled generation can have a quality product for free.
You want a new quality game then pay your own damn way, Im sick of paying for you.
I don't see pure f2p as anything worth much at all. The successful ones are mostly hybrid models, where people who pay subs get to use the freebie players as additional content. Remove the subs money and those games fall into obsolescence quickly - the f2p part is just to populate the world with unscripted NPC's, sort of. The other games rely on the so-called 'whales', and can only do so as long as said whales are available and willing to play and pay for everyone else to play, too...which isn't something I would consider to be infinitely sustainable. Top it off with the poor customer service many f2p's have and imo it becomes clear that the actual solution is that p2p games have to be more aggressive in putting out content. No one wants to pay to keep repeating content; the problem with that statement isn't the 'pay' part...its the 'repeating content' part.
Non-repetitive content, good-to-great customer service, and aggressive design concepts will make a game that many will pay for. Shoddy design, poorly-implemented subsystems and repetitive grinding is the reason f2p ever even got a -chance- to become popular in the first place.
First...did you mean per year? I think you did.
Second...if they're guaranteed to not want to pay more, and there are plenty of f2p players on PC alone, then why would any publisher want to go out of their way to further populate their servers with guaranteed non-sales? Your argument doesn't make a case against subs, it makes a case against including console players -at all-. Now, I don't see console players that way...but that -is- what you're arguing.
Nothing keeps retards out of game, even if the sub was 1000$ a month, you would still have retards.
With that said, if the game in question had content that required a lenthly coordinated effort to conquer, its a huge asset to have the same group of people working on the progression together. Having players hop in and hop out on a whim kind of goes agaisnt that "guild spirit" MMOs should be creating. Half the fun I used to have in WoW was seeing my guild's name as number 3 on our server on wowprogress.
Which goes back to the point of if the endgame content is there (not saying it has to be raids, im just using tha as an example), people will pay for the sub.
That analysis is wrong as I've pointed out in another post. As for your rage, it's borderline paranoia. A subscription game is no more likely to have 'hard working' players than a f2p game. Sub games could easily have those on disability who may not be able to work, or trust fund babies, or unemployed.
What I'm tired of is my subscription dollars subsidizing your 40+ hour a week game addiction when I myself only play 2 to 3 hours per week.
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
I like this one better
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIPS4LyveJs
Nice one! But I still don't like you because you are against CREED ...
Reporter: What's behind Blizzard success, and how do you make your gamers happy?
Blizzard Boss: Making gamers happy is not my concern, making money.. yes!
I am happy to pay a sub fee for a good game too.
there just arent any, ESO, Wildstar will join the list of SWTor, Tera, and RIFT, nice try but next.
RIFT offers more than all of these games combined features, and its free, and I dont have to pay for anything if I dont want, but hey I just bought 50$ of cash store currency to support RIFT's system, I like it.
I have been playing since f2p so about same as if I subbed, but when I sub, I feel like I have to play, now I play when I want to play.
I will likely spend the same amount anyways, and a smart buyer can double up on purchases when they have deals
OK, here's a compromise.
If in the 1st month or 2, Credd does not have a negative impact on the game's economy, and that CREDD is truly being used to subsidize time and not just a lame excuse for NCSoft to legitimize gold selling, I will retract what I said about it.
(But in every game I have played, this has not happened)
I'll be open minded. Otherwise, I'd be interested in a SciFi MMO.
This. The only way I can accept "vanity items" in the item mall is if the game has no focus on aesthetics. FFXIV has a such focus, so it is unacceptable for them to have such "vanity items" in item mall.