Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Why don't MMOs give you CHOICE in payment system and server type?
TheScavenger
Member EpicPosts: 3,321
As a huge sandbox fan from both UO and SWG...both of those offered OPTIONAL PvP (UO didn't at first, but it was dying till it put in optional PvP)...there is no PvE sandbox choice. There is only Ryzom, but its as old/older than WoW and hasn't been modernized like WoW has. UO is too old. SWG is dead, and not buying it since its not digital just to play on Emu server. And I guess I can uh "download" it, but no thanks I don't do that stuff even with dead games.
Like. Look at BDO. The most #1 requested feature is a PvE server. Some say "but it be so boring!" or "you don't know what you really want". but no. ...
I'd play BDO on a PvE server and have a ton of fun. It be like playing skyrim or witcher 3, but as an MMO. That is exactly what I want.
Why don't MMO companies offer choice for sandbox MMOs? Why do only themeparks offer RP/PvP/PVE servers but sandbox MMOs do NOT? Why do they want to limit their playerbase and NOT give them choice? It doesn't hurt the PvPers, they can play on the PvP server. It only hurts gankers (maybe thats why gankers hate it) that want to ruin other players games. I don't understand why there is no optional PVE servers in these games when there are optional PvP servers for themeparks. There is literally no modern sandbox PvE MMO, and closest sorta is BDO since its pretty lite on PvP (as far as consequences go, which makes a lot of PvErs go to the game)...which is why it is so successful since it isn't really hardcore PvP that is full loot.
But why not offer PvE servers? It harms no one but gankers, so no big deal.
And lets move on to the payment system.
Why does an MMO not offer payment choices? Why can't I spend 15 a month in GW2 and get some extra gems or something as a bonus? Let people pay each month if they want it, harms no one and gives more choices. Why does it HAVE to be buy to play only, or pay to play only, or free to play only?
ESO is buy to play, but you can play for free after that and only pay money for DLCs, or not pay at all for anything. Or you can pay 15 a month and get some nice bonuses out of it. Why is ESO (and LOTRO) the only games to offer multiple payment choices? In LOTRO you can grind for hundreds of hours and play completely free, take a lot of grinding, but its possible. The rest of LOTRO payment system is pretty similar to ESO. Why don't more MMOs offer payment choices like ESO and LOTRO? Where is the harm in letting someone pay 15 a month if they want to?
I'd pay 15 a month for GW2 to get gems each month and whatever else bonus they included in the sub (like ESO/LOTRO do). Why don't they allow that to be an option? Why is it ALL or NOTHING?
Where is all the choices in most of these MMOs?
Like. Look at BDO. The most #1 requested feature is a PvE server. Some say "but it be so boring!" or "you don't know what you really want". but no. ...
I'd play BDO on a PvE server and have a ton of fun. It be like playing skyrim or witcher 3, but as an MMO. That is exactly what I want.
Why don't MMO companies offer choice for sandbox MMOs? Why do only themeparks offer RP/PvP/PVE servers but sandbox MMOs do NOT? Why do they want to limit their playerbase and NOT give them choice? It doesn't hurt the PvPers, they can play on the PvP server. It only hurts gankers (maybe thats why gankers hate it) that want to ruin other players games. I don't understand why there is no optional PVE servers in these games when there are optional PvP servers for themeparks. There is literally no modern sandbox PvE MMO, and closest sorta is BDO since its pretty lite on PvP (as far as consequences go, which makes a lot of PvErs go to the game)...which is why it is so successful since it isn't really hardcore PvP that is full loot.
But why not offer PvE servers? It harms no one but gankers, so no big deal.
And lets move on to the payment system.
Why does an MMO not offer payment choices? Why can't I spend 15 a month in GW2 and get some extra gems or something as a bonus? Let people pay each month if they want it, harms no one and gives more choices. Why does it HAVE to be buy to play only, or pay to play only, or free to play only?
ESO is buy to play, but you can play for free after that and only pay money for DLCs, or not pay at all for anything. Or you can pay 15 a month and get some nice bonuses out of it. Why is ESO (and LOTRO) the only games to offer multiple payment choices? In LOTRO you can grind for hundreds of hours and play completely free, take a lot of grinding, but its possible. The rest of LOTRO payment system is pretty similar to ESO. Why don't more MMOs offer payment choices like ESO and LOTRO? Where is the harm in letting someone pay 15 a month if they want to?
I'd pay 15 a month for GW2 to get gems each month and whatever else bonus they included in the sub (like ESO/LOTRO do). Why don't they allow that to be an option? Why is it ALL or NOTHING?
Where is all the choices in most of these MMOs?
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Comments
Cryomatrix
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
If a game was made with PVP in mind then let it be a PVP game. If the game was made to be a PVE game concentrate on that and hell with PVP. Trying to make everyone happy that is causing a lot of the watered down horrible games we have been getting. I really do understand the idea that having separate server types sounds good, but you do realize that separate servers mean separate code, which means more man hours etc...You would think it could be as easy and changing a 0 to a 1 or something but unless the code was originally written with that in mind then not so easy to do a lot of times.
I would rather see a game made from the ground up with a sandbox PVE mindset with no PVP what so ever, so the devs can concentrate on just the PVE aspects and not get side tracked.
As far as the different monetization goes yeah games should do that approach more often where you have optional subs to get everything with bonuses. That would attract me a lot faster than the free to try games they have now.
Nothing stopping 15$ freemium game from adding more intrusive cashshop.
I think for GW2, the reason they are moderately successful is because their payment model. Why don't they add 15$ freemium package like ESO? Because many people won't play it if they add it.
Most sandbox mmorpg pve are so terrible, they can't remove the pvp, because no one will play it just for the pve.
"We all do the best we can based on life experience, point of view, and our ability to believe in ourselves." - Naropa "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." SR Covey
The rest of the genre has people involved with KR style or Wow clone style games,i detest both.
Then there is this new age of arcade style gaming in a mmorpg,my god ,clueless developers.
So there lies the problem ,we get VERY little choice because most past experiences are devs making arpg's/Wow clones/KR clones and tons of cheap 8 bit/locked camera rpg's.
Tanaka is near finished,he promised one last game that would not be about profits but his health was bad so may never see that game,so WHOM in this large world is going to make a game i want to play based on past experiences?
Me personally,yes i would base it on past experiences but not straight up copy,i would tweak and improve ideas that i see as good ideas.There lies the other problem,too many games are outright clones,they all look like WOW/EQ and play similar with npc markers and questing for xp.The only differences i am seeing is how cheap a platform the games are made,some look really bad,some 8 bit,some are locked overhead camera "old school"nothing looks like High Quality.
Problem number #3 Devs seem to be creating games with minimal thought just to start an idea to making money."Oh we have an idea,let's start a KS'r".Smedley was a perfect example,fired and a couple weeks later is trying to sell a super cheap looking pile of rubbish,NO CARE for effort or quality,would sell a rock to his own mother.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
And it certainly isn't cost that is the problem. Some games with little PvE content can't really just add PvE servers since there is too little to do to keep player occupied without PvP but those are few. The actual cost of a PvE or a harrd server is rather low, you would earn more on having them.
And I don't think @Quizzical is right either since most of the PvEers that hate PvP wont play anyways. They could always give a better droprate on PvE drops on the PvE server if they still want some PvEers there and that goes well with risk Vs reward.
I think the whole problem is pride. The devs want you to play their game in a specific way. Add a little laziness (while adding the server isn't much work it is some) and a bit of stupidity (you do loose players when sticking to a single server setting).
Istaria is also pve sandbox
I'd say the same for a game that was only pve as well.
And good for them.
These are companies and they want to make the products they "want to make" for the audience they are intended for.
As far as different ways to pay, some do. I think it leans more toward what will support their business better (or at least what they think will support their business).
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
- Different servers for different types of players ?...No, the will not waste the time.
This sums up this entire post
Or maybe is an amusement park a more fitting comparision, in P2P it is the kind of park that charges you at the door while a F2P game charges you at each ride instead.
But as for different servers for different players that actually do have the potential to bring in more people. That means you can target specific players that really doesn't have anything else to play without loosing other players.
You can't really make a AAA MMO focused on full loot PvP nowadays for instance, there is just too few players that enjoy that type of gameplay to put in $60M+ into a game for them. Giving them a specific server on the other hand is not that expensive.
I do believe that having easy and hard mode servers (with better droprate for hard) would earn you far more cash then just making the open world easy and the endgame hard since enough people want something more challenging.
I am not so sure that full loot PvP actually would earn you that much in comparision but having PvE servers in a game like BDO would earn them cash.
In some cases it is m,ore that the devs want you to play the game in a specific way even if they know another server set would earn them more money. In others I think they never really considered it.
The actual time it takes to make a different serverset is not much. Heck, GW2 nerfed from hard to easy between beta weekend 1 and 3, that is 4 weeks and I doubt making a PvE or open world PvP server is much more work. And the cost of having one more server running isn't that much either.
Thanks for the correction on F2P is more like a pay for ride amusement park and loot boxes are like Casinos.
But still amusement parks having pay per ride is a tricky way to catch the people trying to save money. /scratch head... how did I spend so much ?
Easy and hard mode servers - actually two problems with that.
1) Lots of extra server maintenance. Later when the game goes into maintenance mode when players drop out they need to maintain more.
2) This completely changes the playing field !!!!!
With slower and harder, they would have to add tons more content as filler. They would show their hand on how unbalanced each ability and classes... this adds a lot of work !