Originally posted by Dihoru Gonna love the look on people's faces when, within a year, maybe a year and a half, they announce the game is going F2P or shutting down.
Originally posted by Dihoru Gonna love the look on people's faces when, within a year, maybe a year and a half, they announce the game is going F2P or shutting down.
Most of them wouldn't care anymore because they have moved on to the next big MMO.
Originally posted by Dihoru Gonna love the look on people's faces when, within a year, maybe a year and a half, they announce the game is going F2P or shutting down.
You mean the look of a complete lack of surprise, because adding a free option is normal after a game is a few months old, and if done properly leads to massive amounts of revenue?
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
what i see so far by reading several forums is pretty mich a 50/50 slit on opinions ..now take into account alot of the negative posts are from people who have a phycological disorder that makes them burn any game that isnt the one they want to play .
and from reading this thread not too many people that were already gonna play ESO are that bothered either way
I feel this is just another bash for the sake of it and next week we will all be looking at new posts of non affection aimed elsewere
I also think you will find these CE things available some time after launch as a payed service feature i could be wrong but if they see alot of people upset why wouldnt they make it available and make some cash from it ..as many other mmo's have done and still do
Originally posted by Dihoru Gonna love the look on people's faces when, within a year, maybe a year and a half, they announce the game is going F2P or shutting down.
You mean the look of a complete lack of surprise, because adding a free option is normal after a game is a few months old, and if done properly leads to massive amounts of revenue?
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
The reality is most F2P players never make a single purchase. The vast majority of the ones that do are not reoccurring on a regular basis. You need a whole lot more F2P players to get the same amount of revenue and even then it isn't nearly as stable. On top of that you have to support a hell of a lot more players and that comes with all the additional overhead and costs cutting deeply into profit.
what i see so far by reading several forums is pretty mich a 50/50 slit on opinions ..now take into account alot of the negative posts are from people who have a phycological disorder that makes them burn any game that isnt the one they want to play .
and from reading this thread not too many people that were already gonna play ESO are that bothered either way
I feel this is just another bash for the sake of it and next week we will all be looking at new posts of non affection aimed elsewere
I also think you will find these CE things available some time after launch as a payed service feature i could be wrong but if they see alot of people upset why wouldnt they make it available and make some cash from it ..as many other mmo's have done and still do
Not sure. I was at least on the fence and taking a wait and see attitude with the game. But ?'d rather not support companies that don't respect their players. So they would have to come up with some really impressive stuff to get me back on the fence with this double dip nonsense. Obviously there were fans that were going to buy it no matter what, the people on the fence are the ones that may have issues with this kind of behavior by the devs.
Not being as greedy as you could possibly be doesn't mean you're not being greedy. And I'd like to hear how this allays frustration from players who hated the idea of the faction lock AND aren't willing to preorder games.
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
Just another reason to wait out games.
If they hide behind NDAs and exclusive races if you buy in early...there's too many red flags there to buy in.
Let's see the game is like in 2 years.
Have plenty time to wait, and I prefer playing games that are polished before getting there. No more WoW and RIFT episodes, not going for strike three.
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
The reality is most F2P players never make a single purchase. The vast majority of the ones that do are not reoccurring on a regular basis. You need a whole lot more F2P players to get the same amount of revenue and even then it isn't nearly as stable. On top of that you have to support a hell of a lot more players and that comes with all the additional overhead and costs cutting deeply into profit.
And, as we speak, TOR is one of the greatest success stories in current MMOs. They are making buckets of money, estimated at 139 million in 2013 from the cash shop alone, in addition to their sub revenue. "Less than they could have" where, in a pipe dream? There is no reason to believe any game will ever rival WoW because it rose to the WoW level, rather than because WoW falls all on it's own.
And all the available stats tell us that the general rule when sub games add a cash shop and a free option is that not only the number of players rises, the number of people actually paying for a subscription rises. And the average subscriber spends anywhere from $5.00-$25.00 dollars a month in the cash shop (it varies month to month, reported averages as high as $40.00 per subscriber from sub+cash shop).
For almost all games, at some point in the product's lifecycle, adding a cash shop and free option is going to be a smart move. And it doesn't mean a game is "bad" or has "failed," it just means it is being run by people whose heads aren't stuck in the sand, or somewhere darker and stinkier.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
The reality is most F2P players never make a single purchase. The vast majority of the ones that do are not reoccurring on a regular basis. You need a whole lot more F2P players to get the same amount of revenue and even then it isn't nearly as stable. On top of that you have to support a hell of a lot more players and that comes with all the additional overhead and costs cutting deeply into profit.
And, as we speak, TOR is one of the greatest success stories in current MMOs. They are making buckets of money, estimated at 139 million in 2013 from the cash shop alone, in addition to their sub revenue. "Less than they could have" where, in a pipe dream? There is no reason to believe any game will ever rival WoW because it rose to the WoW level, rather than because WoW falls all on it's own.
And all the available stats tell us that the general rule when sub games add a cash shop and a free option is that not only the number of players rises, the number of people actually paying for a subscription rises. And the average subscriber spends anywhere from $5.00-$25.00 dollars a month in the cash shop (it varies month to month, reported averages as high as $40.00 per subscriber from sub+cash shop).
For almost all games, at some point in the product's lifecycle, adding a cash shop and free option is going to be a smart move. And it doesn't mean a game is "bad" or has "failed," it just means it is being run by people whose heads aren't stuck in the sand, or somewhere darker and stinkier.
It is cost benefit analysis plain and simple. You can't only look at improved sales numbers with F2P from cherry picked games and then also completely ignore the increased cost of doing business with F2P. More players means bigger more expensive hardware, which is fine when everyone is paying you $15 a month but when you have to buy that hardware for a large number of players who aren't paying you anything it can be costly. Not to mention support costs. It isn't an easy no brains decision by any means. Sub is by far the better model if you have the players to support it. Sub allows the devs to focus costs on services and content for their paying customers, F2P means they have to spend a lot on people who will never generate revenue for them. Sales numbers don't tell us much, if you want to see how well the games/companies are actually doing you need gross profit numbers.
It's simply not worth having an emotional reaction to. As long as I have fun, I keep paying. When I stop having fun, I stop paying. It's a very simple approach, and people in general would probably be happier if they all adopted it.
Very well said. Thanks. I was in the last beta weekend, I'm going to play the game because what I saw during that weekend convinced me. I'll play until the game will be fun for me. No need to start a support therapy about a MMORPG :-)
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
The reality is most F2P players never make a single purchase. The vast majority of the ones that do are not reoccurring on a regular basis. You need a whole lot more F2P players to get the same amount of revenue and even then it isn't nearly as stable. On top of that you have to support a hell of a lot more players and that comes with all the additional overhead and costs cutting deeply into profit.
And, as we speak, TOR is one of the greatest success stories in current MMOs. They are making buckets of money, estimated at 139 million in 2013 from the cash shop alone, in addition to their sub revenue. "Less than they could have" where, in a pipe dream? There is no reason to believe any game will ever rival WoW because it rose to the WoW level, rather than because WoW falls all on it's own.
And all the available stats tell us that the general rule when sub games add a cash shop and a free option is that not only the number of players rises, the number of people actually paying for a subscription rises. And the average subscriber spends anywhere from $5.00-$25.00 dollars a month in the cash shop (it varies month to month, reported averages as high as $40.00 per subscriber from sub+cash shop).
For almost all games, at some point in the product's lifecycle, adding a cash shop and free option is going to be a smart move. And it doesn't mean a game is "bad" or has "failed," it just means it is being run by people whose heads aren't stuck in the sand, or somewhere darker and stinkier.
It is cost benefit analysis plain and simple. You can't only look at improved sales numbers with F2P from cherry picked games and then also completely ignore the increased cost of doing business with F2P. More players means bigger more expensive hardware, which is fine when everyone is paying you $15 a month but when you have to buy that hardware for a large number of players who aren't paying you anything it can be costly. Not to mention support costs. It isn't an easy no brains decision by any means. Sub is by far the better model if you have the players to support it. Sub allows the devs to focus costs on services and content for their paying customers, F2P means they have to spend a lot on people who will never generate revenue for them. Sales numbers don't tell us much, if you want to see how well the games/companies are actually doing you need gross profit numbers.
what i see so far by reading several forums is pretty mich a 50/50 slit on opinions ..now take into account alot of the negative posts are from people who have a phycological disorder that makes them burn any game that isnt the one they want to play .
and from reading this thread not too many people that were already gonna play ESO are that bothered either way
I feel this is just another bash for the sake of it and next week we will all be looking at new posts of non affection aimed elsewere
I also think you will find these CE things available some time after launch as a payed service feature i could be wrong but if they see alot of people upset why wouldnt they make it available and make some cash from it ..as many other mmo's have done and still do
Not sure. I was at least on the fence and taking a wait and see attitude with the game. But ?'d rather not support companies that don't respect their players. So they would have to come up with some really impressive stuff to get me back on the fence with this double dip nonsense. Obviously there were fans that were going to buy it no matter what, the people on the fence are the ones that may have issues with this kind of behavior by the devs.
Originally posted by Kevyne-ShandrisImperials have been in Elder Scrolls since Morrowind, and to see they become available for extra cash now? That's the definition of a money grab
Nah, money grab means:
I do not want to pay your price therefore you are stealing money off my pocket.
Sounds stupid, flawed, ridiculous?
There is no controversary in TESO CE, you either buy it or you don't and that is where all discussion ends.
Personally I got burned by NWN, so it's hard to avoid the same symptoms coming from ESO (cash grab wise). It is unfortunate, but ESO exhibits all the symptoms TSW did when it came out (pricing model). Which is unfortunately, because I was looking for a more mature (so not Wildstar) long term mmorpg "home". Unfortunately the developers don't seem to have faith that their product will stand the test of time.
Originally posted by Kevyne-ShandrisI believe gamers should fight, because where gaming looks to be going isn't a pleasant sight.
I assume then in your twisted logic making money isn't a pleasant sight for your business because there is more and more money thrown on online entertainment every year so yeah, they(devs) do something right apparently.
Not your cup of tea? No problem, no one is obliged to satisfy you.
They've changed what they claimed was their core vision for the game at the last minute, in order to beef up box sales. This game will be very similar to every other large MMO now.
Just once I'd like to see a AAA company try to make something a little different than what everyone is used to, but it will never happen. Earning a lot of money quickly (from the masses playing the newest version of the same MMO for a few months) is better (for the company) than a small, steady stream of income over many years (from a smaller, more devoted fan-base). Only indie developers have the motivation to stick to a vision, and they never have the assets to make a polished MMO.
Yes it's an older game but how is this any different to what SOE do with EQ2 at the moment.
If you subscribe you get access to all the content bar the latest expansion (https://www.everquest2.com/membership) if you want the latest expansion you have to purchase that (https://www.everquest2.com/expansion-content) and after that you'd still need to pay for the Freeblood race or the Beastlord class if you want to play those (see notes 3 & 4 on the membership page).
Forum Post count does not = Game Intelligence or Knowledge it just shows how often people like to talk.
It is cost benefit analysis plain and simple. You can't only look at improved sales numbers with F2P from cherry picked games and then also completely ignore the increased cost of doing business with F2P. More players means bigger more expensive hardware, which is fine when everyone is paying you $15 a month but when you have to buy that hardware for a large number of players who aren't paying you anything it can be costly. Not to mention support costs. It isn't an easy no brains decision by any means. Sub is by far the better model if you have the players to support it. Sub allows the devs to focus costs on services and content for their paying customers, F2P means they have to spend a lot on people who will never generate revenue for them. Sales numbers don't tell us much, if you want to see how well the games/companies are actually doing you need gross profit numbers.
Remember, while it doesn't have a comprehensive free option, even WoW has a cash shop. It isn't a question of sub or cash shop. The answer is sub + cash shop. Clearly it is possible to have the cash shop without adding a free option as well, but most companies who have already gone to the expense to implement a cash shop aren't going to want to forego the revenue from people who don't want to sub when they already have the infrastructure in place to get their money too.
You say that remaining sub only is a better model if you have the players to support it. I see people say that a lot. But how many is enough? At what number of subscribers does it become a good idea not to let free players in? Even WoW has twenty free levels, and they have what, 3-4 million western subscribers? Is that how many it would take? Is there any reason to believe another game could even hit that level?
The theory that a subscription only model works better for players in the long run is only relevant if the nature of the present day MMO market is such that it is possible for a game to get and keep the necessary amount of subs to justify not adding a free option. I honestly think the market has changed too much since WoW launched for that to be the case. There are too many high quality games, both out now and in the pipeline, for any one game to have a significant chance of getting and keeping the necessary number of subscribers. The audience (of people theoretically willing to pay a monthly sub) just doesn't seem to be large enough to support two games with WoW numbers, not with the number of quality games it is getting split between.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Originally posted by rguilbertEarning a lot of money quickly
Quickly? MMO development takes +5 years, that is what you call "making money quickly"?
There is plenty of games that are made on much smaller budgets, but I guess you do not want to play those since they are lacking in quality - graphics, polish, content, etc...
Quickly? MMO development takes +5 years, that is what you call "making money quickly"?
There is plenty of games that are made on much smaller budgets, but I guess you do not want to play those since they are lacking in quality - graphics, polish, content, etc...
Small revenue won't pay huge development costs.
Of course, quick is a relative term. We are talking MMOs, so no one is making truly "quick" money. Investors want a return on their investment, as soon as possible. When a game is close to release, pressure has been building for a while to create a large initial profit. That's totally normal. I wasn't saying anything is wrong with this - I was pointing out that this is they way it will always work.
I have played a number of smaller budget games, but they are usually lacking in so many areas that their longevity is also impacted.
I would still like some company to think outside of the box, but that's a risky thing to do. Big companies don't take risks for love of an idea or genre.
When MMOs were first coming out, we saw more diversity in the few large games that were initially released. Now the industry has found a safe, sweet-spot recipe for guaranteed return on investment. Sadly, that means no matter how much we talk about features here on the forums, we will always get the same watered-down game with minor tweaks and a new veneer.
" If anything they have provided a laurel leaf to the Elder Scrolls players that were upset about faction locks. Does this seem counter intuitive to the stance they took on faction locks originally? A little"
No. What it did was prove that everything they said about why they used the base game design was a complete and total lie.
Most TES fans that got upset about the game was WHY ISNT IT OPEN WORLD like TES games? We were told they HAD TO make it this way for realm pride and because MMOs require sacrifices.
It was all BS, like most people said and they PROVED it. Its not a laurel, its a carrot on a stick to lead us away from the real issue, a poor game design that was just shown to be worthless made by people with no intention of making a TES game, just a DaoC remake.
No. It just means they heard what some people said and their dislike of the faction lock. And with a simple preorder they can now do what they wanted. The faction lock was originally there to keep one faction from being vastly more populated than the others.
I was one of those who disliked the faction lock. But It was defended as being essential to the integrity of the AvAvA conflict model; and while I disagreed with the arguments in it's favor, I had come to accept it as immutable.
Yet they threw it away, without even a word as to why they're no longer worried that such a move will damage the things they were once concerned about. Had they given such a word, it would mean exactly what you claim it means.
But without it, something entirely different is implied instead: that 'integrity of the game' is now a secondary concern at best.
I believe gamers should fight, because where gaming looks to be going isn't a pleasant sight.
I assume then in your twisted logic making money isn't a pleasant sight for your business because there is more and more money thrown on online entertainment every year so yeah, they(devs) do something right apparently.
Not your cup of tea? No problem, no one is obliged to satisfy you.
Yes, they are obliged to satisfy their customers...because if they don't, there's a long list of closed, dead and buried games that IP can join.
If they don't want to make a profit -- which is treating customers well -- hey, it's their doom. I can always bring "free" flowers later.
HINT: IT should never man the customer service counters, they'd kill the business.
Comments
The truth of a hater.
Most of them wouldn't care anymore because they have moved on to the next big MMO.
You mean the look of a complete lack of surprise, because adding a free option is normal after a game is a few months old, and if done properly leads to massive amounts of revenue?
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
what i see so far by reading several forums is pretty mich a 50/50 slit on opinions ..now take into account alot of the negative posts are from people who have a phycological disorder that makes them burn any game that isnt the one they want to play .
and from reading this thread not too many people that were already gonna play ESO are that bothered either way
I feel this is just another bash for the sake of it and next week we will all be looking at new posts of non affection aimed elsewere
I also think you will find these CE things available some time after launch as a payed service feature i could be wrong but if they see alot of people upset why wouldnt they make it available and make some cash from it ..as many other mmo's have done and still do
You mean like SWTOR? They had record breaking sales, and if they could have maintained that growth rate by releasing content at a reasonable rate they could have reached subs and revenue that rivaled WoW. Instead they screwed the pooch went F2P and now are making much less money than they could have.
The reality is most F2P players never make a single purchase. The vast majority of the ones that do are not reoccurring on a regular basis. You need a whole lot more F2P players to get the same amount of revenue and even then it isn't nearly as stable. On top of that you have to support a hell of a lot more players and that comes with all the additional overhead and costs cutting deeply into profit.
Not sure. I was at least on the fence and taking a wait and see attitude with the game. But ?'d rather not support companies that don't respect their players. So they would have to come up with some really impressive stuff to get me back on the fence with this double dip nonsense. Obviously there were fans that were going to buy it no matter what, the people on the fence are the ones that may have issues with this kind of behavior by the devs.
Just another reason to wait out games.
If they hide behind NDAs and exclusive races if you buy in early...there's too many red flags there to buy in.
Let's see the game is like in 2 years.
Have plenty time to wait, and I prefer playing games that are polished before getting there. No more WoW and RIFT episodes, not going for strike three.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
And, as we speak, TOR is one of the greatest success stories in current MMOs. They are making buckets of money, estimated at 139 million in 2013 from the cash shop alone, in addition to their sub revenue. "Less than they could have" where, in a pipe dream? There is no reason to believe any game will ever rival WoW because it rose to the WoW level, rather than because WoW falls all on it's own.
And all the available stats tell us that the general rule when sub games add a cash shop and a free option is that not only the number of players rises, the number of people actually paying for a subscription rises. And the average subscriber spends anywhere from $5.00-$25.00 dollars a month in the cash shop (it varies month to month, reported averages as high as $40.00 per subscriber from sub+cash shop).
For almost all games, at some point in the product's lifecycle, adding a cash shop and free option is going to be a smart move. And it doesn't mean a game is "bad" or has "failed," it just means it is being run by people whose heads aren't stuck in the sand, or somewhere darker and stinkier.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
It is cost benefit analysis plain and simple. You can't only look at improved sales numbers with F2P from cherry picked games and then also completely ignore the increased cost of doing business with F2P. More players means bigger more expensive hardware, which is fine when everyone is paying you $15 a month but when you have to buy that hardware for a large number of players who aren't paying you anything it can be costly. Not to mention support costs. It isn't an easy no brains decision by any means. Sub is by far the better model if you have the players to support it. Sub allows the devs to focus costs on services and content for their paying customers, F2P means they have to spend a lot on people who will never generate revenue for them. Sales numbers don't tell us much, if you want to see how well the games/companies are actually doing you need gross profit numbers.
Very well said. Thanks. I was in the last beta weekend, I'm going to play the game because what I saw during that weekend convinced me. I'll play until the game will be fun for me. No need to start a support therapy about a MMORPG :-)
Short and consistent analysis.
Oh, Prima donna! I like it!
Bad devs! Bad behavior! Go to your room!
Nah, money grab means:
I do not want to pay your price therefore you are stealing money off my pocket.
Sounds stupid, flawed, ridiculous?
There is no controversary in TESO CE, you either buy it or you don't and that is where all discussion ends.
Yeah, I heard that talk with employers who said, "don't like it you can just quit" (thus, ruining any chance to get unemployment benefits), too.
I believe gamers should fight, because where gaming looks to be going isn't a pleasant sight.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
I assume then in your twisted logic making money isn't a pleasant sight for your business because there is more and more money thrown on online entertainment every year so yeah, they(devs) do something right apparently.
Not your cup of tea? No problem, no one is obliged to satisfy you.
They've changed what they claimed was their core vision for the game at the last minute, in order to beef up box sales. This game will be very similar to every other large MMO now.
Just once I'd like to see a AAA company try to make something a little different than what everyone is used to, but it will never happen. Earning a lot of money quickly (from the masses playing the newest version of the same MMO for a few months) is better (for the company) than a small, steady stream of income over many years (from a smaller, more devoted fan-base). Only indie developers have the motivation to stick to a vision, and they never have the assets to make a polished MMO.
Yes it's an older game but how is this any different to what SOE do with EQ2 at the moment.
If you subscribe you get access to all the content bar the latest expansion (https://www.everquest2.com/membership) if you want the latest expansion you have to purchase that (https://www.everquest2.com/expansion-content) and after that you'd still need to pay for the Freeblood race or the Beastlord class if you want to play those (see notes 3 & 4 on the membership page).
Remember, while it doesn't have a comprehensive free option, even WoW has a cash shop. It isn't a question of sub or cash shop. The answer is sub + cash shop. Clearly it is possible to have the cash shop without adding a free option as well, but most companies who have already gone to the expense to implement a cash shop aren't going to want to forego the revenue from people who don't want to sub when they already have the infrastructure in place to get their money too.
You say that remaining sub only is a better model if you have the players to support it. I see people say that a lot. But how many is enough? At what number of subscribers does it become a good idea not to let free players in? Even WoW has twenty free levels, and they have what, 3-4 million western subscribers? Is that how many it would take? Is there any reason to believe another game could even hit that level?
The theory that a subscription only model works better for players in the long run is only relevant if the nature of the present day MMO market is such that it is possible for a game to get and keep the necessary amount of subs to justify not adding a free option. I honestly think the market has changed too much since WoW launched for that to be the case. There are too many high quality games, both out now and in the pipeline, for any one game to have a significant chance of getting and keeping the necessary number of subscribers. The audience (of people theoretically willing to pay a monthly sub) just doesn't seem to be large enough to support two games with WoW numbers, not with the number of quality games it is getting split between.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Quickly? MMO development takes +5 years, that is what you call "making money quickly"?
There is plenty of games that are made on much smaller budgets, but I guess you do not want to play those since they are lacking in quality - graphics, polish, content, etc...
Small revenue won't pay huge development costs.
Of course, quick is a relative term. We are talking MMOs, so no one is making truly "quick" money. Investors want a return on their investment, as soon as possible. When a game is close to release, pressure has been building for a while to create a large initial profit. That's totally normal. I wasn't saying anything is wrong with this - I was pointing out that this is they way it will always work.
I have played a number of smaller budget games, but they are usually lacking in so many areas that their longevity is also impacted.
I would still like some company to think outside of the box, but that's a risky thing to do. Big companies don't take risks for love of an idea or genre.
When MMOs were first coming out, we saw more diversity in the few large games that were initially released. Now the industry has found a safe, sweet-spot recipe for guaranteed return on investment. Sadly, that means no matter how much we talk about features here on the forums, we will always get the same watered-down game with minor tweaks and a new veneer.
I was one of those who disliked the faction lock. But It was defended as being essential to the integrity of the AvAvA conflict model; and while I disagreed with the arguments in it's favor, I had come to accept it as immutable.
Yet they threw it away, without even a word as to why they're no longer worried that such a move will damage the things they were once concerned about. Had they given such a word, it would mean exactly what you claim it means.
But without it, something entirely different is implied instead: that 'integrity of the game' is now a secondary concern at best.
Yes, they are obliged to satisfy their customers...because if they don't, there's a long list of closed, dead and buried games that IP can join.
If they don't want to make a profit -- which is treating customers well -- hey, it's their doom. I can always bring "free" flowers later.
HINT: IT should never man the customer service counters, they'd kill the business.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.