It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot News - Ubisoft has announced that The Mighty Quest for Epic Loot will be closing effective October 25th 2016. Developers who had been working on this project have been moved to other Ubisoft titles. As of now, current players will not be able to buy any more virtual currency for the game and will need to spend any they have right now prior to the closure.
Comments
Joined - July 2004
Its not a failure for the game, it has after all lasted a few years, job done.
So... basically the game's concept and sticking strictly to it led to a PvP game with all of the restrictions that PvP places on development (the need for extremely strict balance) without any of the PvP perks of actual player interaction (and all the indirect perks that come from that, like how no two PvP matches are the same whereas a player-vs-playercastle match is the exact opposite and ALWAYS the same), as well as no co-op mode.
Bringing a whole new meaning to the 'if it smells like a Turd it must be ubisoft'... i guess they have had a lot of practice
It's expected.
The question is, whether developers in the west will just create games with the assumption that they will eventually close, only to move on to the next.
Hope not.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Lots of F2P titles are successful. If it is bad or too niche it will not be successful whatever the business model.
F2P works just fine and makes developers quite a bit of money. The thing that it comes down to is whether or not a game continually develops or not if it retains players. As this game is a few years old, hasn't updated that regularly all that much with newer content and it's baser core mechanic is basically base building and invading other people's bases it really didn't have longevity in the long run even if it had been a b2p game or a p2p game (and no one would play the type of game it was for a sub fee)
And stop this "enough is enough go back to the old days of how they did it bull shit" old days is like WoW with a sub fee, expansion costs etc. Except you know we didn't have constant releases and more money poured into the genre at the time. Basically it is wholly unrealistic for a game company to pretty much ever go back to that model being the prominent one unless they bring down game costs to consumers quite a bit and cut sub fees to like 5 dollars instead of 14.99...
Basically the suggestion would lead to a desolate wasteland of fully abandoned games and only a few surviving ultimately with literally no one new wanting to invest in the genre. The publishers and the like would need to realize just how niche the MMORPG market is with the realistic player cap that might move around being 1.5 - 1.7 mill as a WHOLE. (i don't include WoW's numbers as a natural growth pattern curve in the least).
To add to this it has been found that in large part that F2P mmorpgs account for the largest sector of money made from PC gaming in general, so the model most definitely works... Ubisoft just doesn't want to continue working on these titles as they have other multiplayer titles that are AAA games and aren't years old coming.
Many are designed for longevity. I wouldn't really classify either game Ubisoft is shutting down as MMORPGs even. One is a shooter and the other is basically a pvp build dungeon raid dungeon type of game that had a very limited appeal. Most games in general aren't really designed for longevity particularly multiplayer games anymore in the era where we have gotten rid of dedicated servers we are fully reliant on game companies keeping their servers going to be able to do jack shit.
And in large part their statement has to do with the fact that there are people equating it as a sign that f2p doesn't work and they want to see them all shut down. So they are saying that just because one f2p game shut down doesn't mean the business model is a failure to those people which is a fully accurate statement. F2P mmorpgs alone bring in a huge chunk of money.
It is like dating and ending a relationship. Then again, some people never move on...Looking at disgruntled swg players......laughing....
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Now a company could launch as b2p or b2p + sub but unless all other games on the market abandon the f2p model they will struggle. Now a "more expensive" "better quality" "heavily marketed" game should sell more copies the extra expense may far exceed the extra revenue.
Clearly all models can work. A game like LoL demonstrates the f2p is alive and well; a game like Eve shows that subs can work; a game like Destiny that a b2p strategy can also work. Success is probably down to a combination of factors - design, marketing, when they launched - and not simply about the revenue model.
And at the end of the day all games grow old. And as they age it becomes harder to a) retain subscribers b) sell DLC / expansions c) sell cash shop items. Or any combination of a), b) or c). Decay that developers can slow by creating new content, running advertising campaigns and so forth. They can't stop death however. All games die.
Now whether f2p - the result of players preferring to spend less rather than more - leads to poorer or shorter lived games is another question.
The game concept was a pretty neat combination of Dungeon Keeper and Diablo(loosely speaking). The base game was pretty fun.
The design and effort put into the game were laughable, at best, though. They got it to a beta phase then basically just abandoned development and tried to milk the cash shop.
As someone mentioned, it's an Ubisoft game, so that definitely held things back. They don't seem to have the greatest of care when it comes to depth.
Boy: Why can't I talk to Him?
Mom: We don't talk to Priests.
As if it could exist, without being payed for.
F2P means you get what you paid for. Pay nothing, get nothing.
Even telemarketers wouldn't think that.
It costs money to play. Therefore P2W.