Howdy, Stranger!

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

do u think gw 2 model would work?

2»

Comments

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,447
    If they simply change to B2P then - initially - the only people to benefit will be resellers with unsold copies on their shelves. NCSoft would only benefit if there were subsequent reorders or a big spike in digital sales (so they would also need a price cut).

    A change to f2p would only help if they marketed the change - and had a cash shop in place etc.

    My suggestion in another post: whatever they decide about pricing think about e.g. giving away a digital copy with every GW2 xpac. Use their other games basically.
  • MoiraeMoirae Member RarePosts: 3,318
    The GW2 model is terrible. It always has been. There isn't a less social friendly MMO out there than that one. There isn't a less PVE friendly game than that one. You don't actually have to TALK to anyone in the game, player or npc, to accomplish anything. And I'm a solo player, so that says something. Quests are gained automatically as you play so you don't need to ever talk to anyone at any time, except for the npc's during the first ten levels. It's the single worst model I've ever seen. 
  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,726
    Originally posted by Moirae
    The GW2 model is terrible. It always has been. There isn't a less social friendly MMO out there than that one. There isn't a less PVE friendly game than that one. You don't actually have to TALK to anyone in the game, player or npc, to accomplish anything. And I'm a solo player, so that says something. Quests are gained automatically as you play so you don't need to ever talk to anyone at any time, except for the npc's during the first ten levels. It's the single worst model I've ever seen. 

    I think you just missed the point of this thread and what "gw2 model" means in this context by 100%.

    Harbinger of Fools
  • grimalgrimal Member UncommonPosts: 2,908
    Originally posted by Nasa
    I dont think any business model change would help. Too few players find this game entertaining enough to use time on.

    Says who?

    There are plenty of people that find the game entertaining.  For all the people that point out the faults of the game, there are those that actually enjoy the game.  I certainly do.  I will gladly play if it goes B2P or F2P.  The reason I stopped playing is because it didn't warrant a sub fee for the lower population.  I think switching business models will definitely help with the population since it's the reason I stopped playing (and others from what I have read).

     

  • arakkunearakkune Member UncommonPosts: 24
    Originally posted by Moirae
    The GW2 model is terrible. It always has been. There isn't a less social friendly MMO out there than that one. There isn't a less PVE friendly game than that one. You don't actually have to TALK to anyone in the game, player or npc, to accomplish anything. And I'm a solo player, so that says something. Quests are gained automatically as you play so you don't need to ever talk to anyone at any time, except for the npc's during the first ten levels. It's the single worst model I've ever seen. 

    What ur doing is bashing on guild wars 2 - the game. we are talking about the payment model which is one of the better ones- and buy to play can help a game it did for teso when people arent pressured to pay they might play more and dont feel obligated .On a monthly basis pay to play turns some people off ws so my honest opinion is guild wars 2- payment model might do it. From what the financial report says WS has a lower revenue than the niche "The secret world" which is rly weird when it was labeled as a AAA mmorpg and had so much potential.

  • grimalgrimal Member UncommonPosts: 2,908
    Originally posted by Amjoco
    Originally posted by Wizardry

    As poster 2 already said ...too late.It is not even about that,it is about the whole design of the game,imo is was a cheap budget design,one that with marketing might show some early success but would fail eventually with no long term staying power.

    I do not like cartoony graphics,especially cheap looking ones.It ruins every possible visual in the game and guess what ,this is 3d VIDEO gaming,not the era of muds.Even your housing is weaker when it does not look good,items don't looks good,effects don't look good basically nothing looks good.So then we always hear "well game play matters more",wrong ,the ENTIRE game matters especially since 99% of the games are all the same,so you can't use the argument that game matters more when every other game is doing the same thing,with linear game play and tons of hand holding.

    It is really simple,they went for a budget design,that is always going to be a crap shoot.They should be happy theior marketing made them some money,but judging how every game for the last 7 years has died off quickly after a few months,they should not be surprised their game did as well.

    You want staying power,you need to put in the effort and cost otherwise expect in and out player base gaming.

    Typical comment from SWTOR forums back in 2012. It is far from too late for this title, it will rebound like others imo. 

    The cartoony looks have nothing to do with popularity of a title, WoW has shown this. I understand if folks don't like it, but the gameplay offsets any of this. 

    Staying power has nothing to do with price, it all depends on the design and execution. SWTOR cost more than $150 to produce and almost folded until changes were made.

    I agree wholeheartedly.  For me, the game would fill the empty WoW space.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,447
    Originally posted by Herase

    Think B2P would be fine and they should keep the model they're going with now ( content every few months), they seem to be able to keep up with demands even with low numbers. F2P would ruin it tbh, in the sense they would have to water the gameplay down and lower the effort needed to earn anything.

     The content they are putting out now however will have been started months ago; when the average number of subscriberserk was higher and the hope will have been: push out new content and people will stay subbed. Hasn't worked.

    This quarter @$15 average subs are 52k. Last quarter 112k average. Two quarters ago - when decisions will have been taken - c. 340k. With CREDD and multi-month discounts mean the numbers are approx but a 66% decline in revenue followed by a 54% decline .... it's bleak.

    And it's the recent numbers that have already shaped the future. The numbers don't support a keep doing what they have been doing approach. Nor can they. Staff have been cut. More being cut would come as no surprise.

  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,011
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by Herase
    Think B2P would be fine and they should keep the model they're going with now ( content every few months), they seem to be able to keep up with demands even with low numbers. F2P would ruin it tbh, in the sense they would have to water the gameplay down and lower the effort needed to earn anything.

     The content they are putting out now however will have been started months ago; when the average number of subscriberserk was higher and the hope will have been: push out new content and people will stay subbed. Hasn't worked. This quarter @$15 average subs are 52k. Last quarter 112k average. Two quarters ago - when decisions will have been taken - c. 340k. With CREDD and multi-month discounts mean the numbers are approx but a 66% decline in revenue followed by a 54% decline .... it's bleak. And it's the recent numbers that have already shaped the future. The numbers don't support a keep doing what they have been doing approach. Nor can they. Staff have been cut. More being cut would come as no surprise.

    At this rate it would be better for them to shut this game down.  Yes its profitable but barely.  People called me nuts for saying 20 and 40 man raiding would never work again.  Well turns out I was right.  That does not mean Hardcore raiding without LFR tools will not work, you just have to have smaller raid groups and raiding focused right and have the other non raid content for casuals (Not casual raiders). 

  • AmjocoAmjoco Member UncommonPosts: 4,858
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by Herase
    Think B2P would be fine and they should keep the model they're going with now ( content every few months), they seem to be able to keep up with demands even with low numbers. F2P would ruin it tbh, in the sense they would have to water the gameplay down and lower the effort needed to earn anything.

     The content they are putting out now however will have been started months ago; when the average number of subscriberserk was higher and the hope will have been: push out new content and people will stay subbed. Hasn't worked. This quarter @$15 average subs are 52k. Last quarter 112k average. Two quarters ago - when decisions will have been taken - c. 340k. With CREDD and multi-month discounts mean the numbers are approx but a 66% decline in revenue followed by a 54% decline .... it's bleak. And it's the recent numbers that have already shaped the future. The numbers don't support a keep doing what they have been doing approach. Nor can they. Staff have been cut. More being cut would come as no surprise.

    At this rate it would be better for them to shut this game down.  Yes its profitable but barely.  People called me nuts for saying 20 and 40 man raiding would never work again.  Well turns out I was right.  That does not mean Hardcore raiding without LFR tools will not work, you just have to have smaller raid groups and raiding focused right and have the other non raid content for casuals (Not casual raiders). 

    I'm not sure why people keep wanting to shut it down when it costs them nothing out of their own pocket.

    This title hasn't even attempted B2P yet alone F2P. There is way too much invested in it simply to bury it already, and there are way to many players still interested in it as well. Even Warhammer gave F2P up unitl level 10 for more than a year before it shut the doors. 

     

    Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.

  • kitaradkitarad Member EpicPosts: 5,259
    NCSoft shutdown City of Heroes/Villains because they already made their money back on it and then some. Wildstar is not in a similar position they will try other things before they shut it down I think.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,447
    Is it covering it's costs though? (Profit would imply paying off the cost of development, dividends and so forth.) Even assuming revenue has stabilised at $800k a month (not so if subs in March were lower than Jan) after VAT/sales tax as applicable, transaction charges, city/county taxes, utility charges, rent and salaries it may not be. Salaries especially - not just the salary part but the medical, dental, 401k, employee state and federal taxes... and I doubt the senior management are earning average salaries.

    So if you are NCSoft looking at 4 quarters of declining revenue, hopes of picking up WoW subscribers dashed, summer coming and no evidence things have bottomed out yet what do you do?
  • MoiraeMoirae Member RarePosts: 3,318

    I see no reason whatsoever why the payment model is any better than the game itself. The idea of paying once and then no new money coming in till the next expansion or for nothing things in the game store is just insane. It costs money to employ people to be devs, for hardware and software, basic bills like water and electricity for the designers and devs, money for things like gm's, and for people to police the forums, etc. This stuff doesn't happen for free. And sooner or later that money will run out. I don't even understand how this game is still open or making a profit of any kind. 

     

    The reason you consider it one of the better ones is that you have to pay once and only once and nothing more. That doesn't make it good. There is a reason why the game is designed the way it is (without npc's giving quests or the need to talk to other players) and its exactly because it requires less work and investment.

     

    This kind of payment model is part of whats causing the failure of the genre and causing it to lose players. Its the same reason that reality tv shows are popular. Because they don't have to hire writers to keep things going. 

     

    It's a terrible practice and we do not need to encourage this behavior any more than we need to encourage new reality tv shows. Quality programs and games come at an expense. 

  • AkumawraithAkumawraith Member UncommonPosts: 370
    Originally posted by arakkune

    its not about if its the best for the game just interested if u think gw1-2 model would be good for the game (ofcoure with advertising)

    so base game for a price and expansions in 1 -2 years

    Or maybe something like the secret world where drops will be like issues 1 drop 3 months (like right now) but  u have to buy them

    So what do u think?

    I prefer The Secret Worlds issue release schedule. The side stories and scenarios are nice also. Sure I have to pay for them or sub for a month or three to purchase the content from the store...

     

    Paying 60 bucks for a lack luster low content expansion should be boycotted by players. GW2. WoW and all these games with expansions that they profit from have low content and lack luster stories... they need to take a queue from Yoshi over there in Final Fantasy XIV ARR:

     

    Heavensward expansion.. beautiful, action packed and alot of new content... 40 bucks,, and 130 for the CE package... think thats alot? check it out and then ask yourself if its worth it... personally I will be purchasing the 130 dollar CE for the dragon and the soundtrack...

     

    http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/heavensward

    Played: UO, LotR, WoW, SWG, DDO, AoC, EVE, Warhammer, TF2, EQ2, SWTOR, TSW, CSS, KF, L4D, AoW, WoT

    Playing: The Secret World until Citadel of Sorcery goes into Alpha testing.

    Tired of: Linear quest games, dailies, and dumbed down games

    Anticipating:Citadel of Sorcery

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,726
    Originally posted by Moirae

    I don't even understand how this game is still open or making a profit of any kind. 

    This is the tl;dr of your whole post. You don't understand.

    The statistics show that the game is profitable. So if you don't like the game that's ok but others do enjoy it.

     

    And the topic is actually: Gw2 is profitable so could this model turn Wildstar into a profitable game too?

    Just a reminder..

    Harbinger of Fools
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,447
    Originally posted by Dakeru

    Originally posted by Moirae
    I don't even understand how this game is still open or making a profit of any kind. 

    This is the tl;dr of your whole post. You don't understand.

    The statistics show that the game is profitable. So if you don't like the game that's ok but others do enjoy it.

     

    And the topic is actually: Gw2 is profitable so could this model turn Wildstar into a profitable game too?

    Just a reminder..

     WS isn't profitable. Profitable would mean covering it's costs, paying down the development costs (or repaid if talking absolute profit) and still having money left over ie the profit. Based on 4 quarters of revenue it's not profitable.

    Is it covering it's costs? Q2 last year probably not - two thirds of the revenue was eaten up by marketing and Carbine had a lot of staff. Q3 maybe, depends how quickly they reduced staffing and what severance costs they had. Q4 as Q3 a race between declining revenue and cutting costs. Q1 unless they are at or below 50 staff probably not.

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,726
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by Dakeru
    Originally posted by Moirae

    I don't even understand how this game is still open or making a profit of any kind. 

    This is the tl;dr of your whole post. You don't understand.

    The statistics show that the game is profitable. So if you don't like the game that's ok but others do enjoy it.

     

    And the topic is actually: Gw2 is profitable so could this model turn Wildstar into a profitable game too?

    Just a reminder..

     WS isn't profitable. Profitable would mean covering it's costs, paying down the development costs (or repaid if talking absolute profit) and still having money left over ie the profit. Based on 4 quarters of revenue it's not profitable. Is it covering it's costs? Q2 last year probably not - two thirds of the revenue was eaten up by marketing and Carbine had a lot of staff. Q3 maybe, depends how quickly they reduced staffing and what severance costs they had. Q4 as Q3 a race between declining revenue and cutting costs. Q1 unless they are at or below 50 staff probably not.

    Sorry when I say "the game is profitable" I am refering to Gw2 which Moirae seems to have a deep disgust for.

    Read her post from page 3 and you will understand.

    Harbinger of Fools
  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member LegendaryPosts: 6,676
    Even though I probably wouldn't play it if it was either B2P or F2P, I'd honestly prefer the game to go B2P vs F2P. GW2 has a very fair system in regards to business model that many games should honestly follow.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,447
    Ah. My apologies Dakeru.

    GW2 is indeed profitable - in very simple terms because games without a sub as (as a general rule) sell more than those without. On top of which it makes "some money" from it's cash shop. Lots of copie s though is the pre-requisite.
  • ReallyNow10ReallyNow10 Member UncommonPosts: 2,225
    Originally posted by arakkune

    its not about if its the best for the game just interested if u think gw1-2 model would be good for the game (ofcoure with advertising)

    so base game for a price and expansions in 1 -2 years

    Or maybe something like the secret world where drops will be like issues 1 drop 3 months (like right now) but  u have to buy them

    So what do u think?

    Is the "GW2 model" working for GW2?  That's the question I would get answered first, before I thought about applying it to Wildstar.

  • DakeruDakeru Member EpicPosts: 3,726
    Originally posted by ReallyNow10

    Is the "GW2 model" working for GW2?  That's the question I would get answered first, before I thought about applying it to Wildstar.

    You know that's what this thread is based on.. the quarterly financial report...

    Harbinger of Fools
  • hallucigenocidehallucigenocide Member RarePosts: 1,003

    i think they'd have to have to more than just go b2p at this moment..  basically throw free trials at as many people as they possibly can in order to get them to buy the thing..  and maybe even some try our endgame for free weekends and what not.

    as seen here on  the forums lots of people who tried it gave up before even getting to mid levels out of boredom so they did not even experience all what it has to offer.

    I had fun once, it was terrible.

Sign In or Register to comment.