|
I posted this in the FF14 thread, but I think it applies here. As far as subs go, I think people are willing to pay it provided that there is enough value long term. 15 bucks a month for a game that provides entertainment over a span of year is a great loving deal, especially when you compare it to some console players that buy one game a month for 60. The problem is that the perceived notion of value has changed a ton and the quality of mmo's released lately have been absolutely horrid. You can count on less than 1 hand mmo's that have the perception of not failing: WoW, Rift, GW2. People are used to the notion of F2P by now, the few (idiots) subsidize the many and why pay for something when you don't have to. Will the sub model work? We know it does. Will it bring in enough revenue to keep NCsoft happy? That's the answer no one knows yet.
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
I got a steampunk shield and jade skin during those events and didn't spend a single cent, you're talking out of your rear end or never even played those updates. But yeah like you said, this isn't the GW2 thread.Rylek posted:WoW- biggest MMO still= subscription SWTOR: Arguably failed, converted to F2P pretty fast LOTRO: Long running sub game, converted to F2P to survive WAR: Sub at first, what on earth happened there? TESO: Expected subscription? Expected to be poo poo. STO: Started with a sub, converted to F2P and ended up thriving somehow Rift: Started with a sub, was dying so went F2P. Then you have new high profile F2P games like Firefall, Neverwinter, PS2, and things like GW1/2, your argument is completely blown out of the water.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:WAR: Sub at first, what on earth happened there? http://www.warhammeronline.com/Forever-Free-Trial "Free Forever, play open RvR in our trial" You're free to play a small fragment of their pvp content. Lowbie chaos vs empire. No stories, no higher level stuff. No other races. You sub to get the other stuff. It's an unlimited demo model.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:22
|
|
|
I think the sub model can work, but I would certainly rather see a more modern model. It's going to need to impress people right out of the gate if it wants to be successful, but at least the 2014 delay makes me more confident that it can do it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:25
|
|
|
Rylek posted:I guess I don't understand what you're saying here. What's the difference between stuff I like and stuff I 'really' want? How much money would I had to spend to get a Jade weapon skin during that event in GW2? How about a Steam Punk shield during that event? You're telling me I can get these items for less than $15.00? Can you explain to me how you would accomplish this? Those aren't cash shop items. Those are items you get by playing the game. Really, the same way that you get items in a subscription game, by playing it. If you hated getting those items, then you are going to loving loathe getting stuff in Wildstar (or any other MMO for that matter). WoW- Is dying. Blizzard won't convert it to B2P even though they could keep the game going longer by doing so, because they don't see a reason to spend all of the time required to make that conversion. I kind of agree with them, at this point I'd rather see it die out. They are already siding away from subscriptions for Titan FFXIV- Was released this week? Even though its a "re-release", you can't present a one week old game as some sort of success story for subscriptions. Also it has the final fantasy name. Wildstar- You have drank the worst of the hype juice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I got a steampunk shield and jade skin during those events and didn't spend a single cent, you're talking out of your rear end or never even played those updates. But yeah like you said, this isn't the GW2 thread. Connan: Sub dropped to F2P, still alive despite literally everything that could go wrong DCUO: Sub then dropped to F2P, still dropping DLC/Updates and doing fine Defiance: Didn't even bother with a sub, B2P with DLC packs TSW: Sold enough lifetime subscriptions to switch to F2P while raking in more cash. Odds on Wildstar offering lifetime subscriptions a month or two before release? edit: Reverend Dr posted:
WoW is already merging servers in the next patch(doing it the most rear end backwards way to not call it merges), and getting deep into the cash shop model. It'll flip to free to play before it drops under 5 million subs or so, just so they don't have to report the actual numbers anymore. Perception is everything. My Gimmick Name fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I got a steampunk shield and jade skin during those events and didn't spend a single cent, you're talking out of your rear end or never even played those updates. But yeah like you said, this isn't the GW2 thread. CLAM DOWN posted:I am honestly ashamed to post this and I would like everyone here to mock me relentlessly: At least you got your skin.  quote:Then you have new high profile F2P games like Firefall, Neverwinter, PS2, and things like GW1/2, your argument is completely blown out of the water. Firefall- Not a MMORPG, will be in Beta forever Neverwinter- Piece of poo poo F2P cash grab that has all but been abandoned PS2- Not even remotely a MMORPG I guess we have different definitions of 'high profile'.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
Rylek posted:At least you got your skin. Oooo drat, I forgot about that, you sure showed me by digging that up. It was the jade one I got without spending anything, I forgot and wasn't trying to intentionally mislead. I also got a shitload of other stuff from those keys, including a tonic that would be worth 500g+ if it was sellable, so yeah at least I got my skin! Also Firefall is objectively an MMO, and PS2 is a persistent massively multiplayer game as well. Doesn't have to be "RPG" to be an MMO. My Gimmick Name above threw out 4 more games to add to my list proving why you're wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
Xavier434 posted:FFXIV - Nearly 25 years of IP. The name "Final Fantasy" may very well be better known than "World of Warcraft". The success of their sub model is still to be determined. And on top of that, it's only But yeah, this news has basically entirely killed my interest in Wildstar. $60 is way the hell out of impulse buy range, and especially so with a monthly fee on top of that. This is the absolute worst of both worlds for getting players to actually try your game, and I'm guessing there won't be a "free up to level #" trial either because they probably would have announced that along with this news if there was. The 'week long' trials thing is an OKAY idea I guess though. Sixty loving dollars. I don't even know what the hell. Gwyrgyn Blood fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:34
|
|
|
No you're wrong. No you're wrong. No, you're wrong. Holy poo poo, enough already. Either you're willing to spend $15 a month for the game or you're not. As we get closer to the game's launch and we see more of what they're going to offer we'll each need to decide if it's worth the cost to us. For me, I'm willing to try it out and play it. If it's still fun 30 days out, I'll pay the subscription fee.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:35
|
|
|
Rylek posted:At least you got your skin. Unfortunately Arus is a fool.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 18:39
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:I don't know, this "old-school" business model is just another of Carbine's backwards decisions regarding their game. They even admit they aren't looking closely at the competition, how does that make any sense? One of the best facts about having competition is that it forces you to adapt and be better, but went ahead and said "nope, let's ignore the last few years and release the game like it's 2009!". I agree with you that Carbine is being a little too hubristic about Wildstar - though I'm not sure how we could ever stop developers of even the shittiest titles from hyping their games. The last few years may have seen the release of many different MMORPGs with a bunch of varied business models but in my opinion, while none of those MMOs could technically be called failures, none of them could really be called successful "hits" either. GW2 is perhaps the exception to that but then it is a very different game to most MMOs with practically no PvE endgame and seemingly no plans to change that. Many non-subscription business models were introduced into games because they simply could not justify a subscription model to a modern MMO audience due to the content of the games, not because the subscription model is inherently bad or unwanted. I think that the current trend of MMORPG business models lends a lot of credence to the idea that people are tired of paying subs but that those same MMORPGs have all been lacking in one department or another should not be overlooked - I do think a sub is still justifiable, but only for a very specific game. Let's look at the actual quote: mmorpg.com posted:I asked the Gaffer if he and the rest of Carbine would be paying attention to the soon-to-launch Final Fantasy XIV: A Ream Reborn, since it’s another game that’s sticking with subscriptions in an increasingly F2P market. His answer? “We’re not watching the competition too closely at all, really.” Why? “Because business model does have an impact, but in general good games do well. And we know what we have is good and worth that value. But more importantly, the elder game needs to be there, all the content needs to be there, the features list needs to be full. If we have those things, and we do, we’ll be fine.” In my opinion all the MMORPGs released in the past few years have all failed to meet Gaffney's criteria of a "good game"; criteria which I personally agree with. I realize this is completely subjective and therefore bullshit but I can't think of a single game amongst the MMORPG releases in the last five or so years that has had all of the following: a) Interesting and fun combat and mechanics. b) A good, varied and relatively long levelling experience. c) A full list of features: quality-of-life or otherwise. d) A bunch of fun, difficult content to do at the endgame (solo, PvP and PvE) that has longevity. e) Perhaps the most important - a regular schedule of substantial content releases. Now I don't think that business model and the quality, size and frequency of content are related, nor am I saying that the games which I perceive to be lackluster are so because they didn't have a subscription model. The reason Carbine/NCSoft is opting for a sub model is yes, greed but also because they believe they have met those criteria and that people will sub for such a game (I would). The reason a game like SWTOR came out with a sub model is because BioWare misguidedly believed they had a "good game" that people would pay for or would at least be able to achieve it within a few months. However, the sub model wasn't the reason that it failed (despite what BioWare would tell you) - it failed because it was lacking so many of things I listed above that it simply couldn't justify the sub model. Whether Carbine is as deluded as BioWare were remains to be seen of course, but if what Gaffney alleges is true, then I'll think there's a chance to see the sub model once again be successful. My feelings are that in the unlikely event that all those criteria (and probably more that I've forgotten) are met, then a subscription model is completely justified - especially with the PLEX-like option. Of course, I could be utterly wrong about this... but I simply can't imagine a scenario where a game that met all the wants of most MMORPG players (apart from the ethereal "something new and different") would fail due to its sub model, simply because people who view subs as "archaic" would refuse to pay. I am basically saying this will only work if they create the perfect MMO, which while unlikely, is not impossible and for my tastes, Wildstar seems like it could be on track for something nearing that. Also I said "criteria" a lot, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I got a steampunk shield and jade skin during those events and didn't spend a single cent, you're talking out of your rear end or never even played those updates. But yeah like you said, this isn't the GW2 thread. There's a pretty hefty assumption going on here, and that is that any of these were good games. Hint: They weren't. Yes we all know that F2P can breath life into a game that is largely crap, mainly because it allows people to quickly shift from crap game to crap game as you run out of things to do (This is pretty much how I treat Cryptic games). The question at hand is if a game is good; can it survive a sub model. The answer is "Yes". It's not a failed subscription model, it just requires more effort thrown into the finished product than say... Star Trek Online. It needs a solid post release content delivery schedule unlike say ToR. Lets face it you can point to any one of the games mentioned above and point to what caused them troubles, and not a single one of them was "This game cost money". The free to play model saved them because the games themselves were weak showings and barely worth playing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:33
|
|
|
Hopefully they open the beta up a bit more so I get a chance to play it, to be honest i really dont mind a subscription model I was expecting something new due to the fact they had said eariler it would be a new take on the mmo buisness model. Its simple really if it isnt interesting to me ill simply cancel my subscription I'll be shocked if they add things monthly all mmos say that but never deliver
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Rylek posted:PS2- Not even remotely a MMORPG That's because its a MMOFPS?  It's still Massively Multiplayer Online.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:There's a pretty hefty assumption going on here, and that is that any of these were good games. Hint: They weren't. Yes we all know that F2P can breath life into a game that is largely crap, mainly because it allows people to quickly shift from crap game to crap game as you run out of things to do (This is pretty much how I treat Cryptic games). The question at hand is if a game is good; can it survive a sub model. The answer is "Yes". WoW will let you play for free until level 20 at least. This is literally a worse sub model than WoW.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:52
|
|
|
I'm fine with a sub. I may even prefer it. What I'm disappointed about is the $60 box price. If anything keeps me from playing Wildstar at launch, it's going to be the box price. I understand where they're coming from. They want to guarantee some revenue even if the game doesn't end up having the longevity they're hoping for. Fine. But at that price, at least give me 2-3 months free. I don't mind big box prices for non MMOs because I'm usually confident I'll at least enjoy one play through, even if it's not the best game in the world. With MMOs, it's hard to know how grindy it is, how challenging it is, how intriguing the world is or what the gameplay is like before playing. There are MMOs I've stopped playing after a few days (hours in 1 case) because I realized they weren't what I was looking for. Paying $60 for an MMO I decide not to invest time into makes me feel like I've been robbed. If you have to charge $60 + subscription without multiple months waived, at least let me play for 7 days completely free to decide if this is something I want to invest time and money into. For me, playing an MMO is all about the long term investment. If I only play for a few days, I got nothing out of it. I want a pricing structure that doesn't punish me too harshly for taking a risk on a new game. I want the company to have the confidence and dignity to say, "if after a few days you do not want to keep playing, either the game is not for you, or we've failed. In either case, we don't want your money."
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:55
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:There's a pretty hefty assumption going on here, and that is that any of these were good games. Hint: They weren't. Yes we all know that F2P can breath life into a game that is largely crap, mainly because it allows people to quickly shift from crap game to crap game as you run out of things to do (This is pretty much how I treat Cryptic games). The question at hand is if a game is good; can it survive a sub model. The answer is "Yes". I never said they were all good games, we were talking about revenue models (not the quality of the game). That's another pretty hefty assumption! It's objectively false that LOTRO was a bad game, for example, it's only post-Mirkwood that it's falling off, and there's definitely very good things about Rift too (never seen developers as good as the Rift Trion guys, ever). Things like SWTOR and STO were bad absolutely, but yeah I wasn't talking about the quality of the actual games, solely the pay type. We don't even know if Wildstar is any good yet, but it's pretty clear that a game with 40-man raiding isn't catering to the majority, it's aimed at the nostalgic minority from EQ/vanilla WoW days (Carbine flat out said this, it's not really up for debate who their target audience is). And giving it an outdated and unfriendly revenue model is not a recipe for instant success.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 19:57
|
|
|
If they have content I will pay no problem. I don't mind paying if it means I can actually stay with an mmo for longer than 2 months. I am bummed so many people will just ignore this game because of the sub and pay no attention to the quality.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
LtOrange posted:If they have content I will pay no problem. I don't mind paying if it means I can actually stay with an mmo for longer than 2 months. I am bummed so many people will just ignore this game because of the sub and pay no attention to the quality. It's not that I want to ignore it, it's that I don't make enough money to justify two MMO subs. The quality looks amazing so far, I just wish I could afford two MMOs  I mean, $30 a month doesn't sound like a lot but it really is
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:08
|
|
|
skipping all the ridiculous arguments (because I've heard them all before in just about every MMO thread and they're getting really old) I prefer the sub model. Most games that implement F2P do it in a very lovely fashion (I'm looking at you SWTOR and Rift) and the loss of quality of life features is freaking annoying. I understand why they do it and if it lets them stay afloat, then more power to them, but I still prefer sub.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:12
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:We don't even know if Wildstar is any good yet, but it's pretty clear that a game with 40-man raiding isn't catering to the majority, it's aimed at the nostalgic minority from EQ/vanilla WoW days (Carbine flat out said this, it's not really up for debate who their target audience is). And giving it an outdated and unfriendly revenue model is not a recipe for instant success. I have to wonder if the delay is retooling a lot of "classic" mechanics like getting incremental upgrades to your spells every level and having to travel back to town to train them (as seen on some of the leaked stuff). Lord knows their tagging system as described seemed like an overly complicated mess when compared to just simple open tagging. Seems like their success or financial failure is how much baggage they can throw out before they sink with the nostalgia. As a shareholder, "niche" isn't a market I'd want for a multimillion dollar investment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Wondered what all the new posts were about. I'm REALLY excited it's sub based. F2P games, while awesome, tend to attract a load of trash.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:19
|
|
|
Runefaust posted:Wondered what all the new posts were about. Every game is full of trash people, business model has nothing to do with it. I mean, you're not going to tell me that the population of WoW consists of kind warm-hearted and high-class people, are you? vvv I don't get it 
CLAM DOWN fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:25
|
|
|
Every forum is full of trash people, business model has nothing to do with it. I mean, you're not going to tell me that the population of The Something Awful Forums consists of kind warm-hearted and high-class people, are you? drat
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:31
|
|
|
Macaluso posted:It's not that I want to ignore it, it's that I don't make enough money to justify two MMO subs. The quality looks amazing so far, I just wish I could afford two MMOs Totally agree with you on that. I can only play one mmo seriously at a time especially if they are payed subscriptions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Every game is full of trash people, business model has nothing to do with it. I mean, you're not going to tell me that the population of WoW consists of kind warm-hearted and high-class people, are you? EH yeah true. But on the opposite end - look at the communities for LoL, DotA 2, exc. Sure, WoW's community is entitled as gently caress, but I never faced the same mongrels as I have in F2P games. That being said, it's not like I'm against F2P models - they can work out really, really well. My worry is that unless a F2P model is done just right, most companies that go F2P release sub-par content updates. I really don't know if there's really a correlation between the quality of content and an MMO's choice of either going the F2P or Sub route, but from what I've experienced it sure seems like it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
This thread is just the worst pile of crap in the world. No one here has any idea if it's going to work or not. I know there's not a lot to talk about as far as content right now, but how are you guys even keeping yourself entertained arguing about this poo poo. Content: I'm probably going to pay for it and I'll gladly hand out my free trials to other goons so they don't have to budget to try a game out. I hope you all find peace soon and just re-loving-lax.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 20:59
|
|
|
Korlac posted:Most games that implement F2P do it in a very lovely fashion (I'm looking at you SWTOR and Rift) Huh? What's wrong with rift's model? It's completely free, you only pay for convenience and the prices are actually pretty reasonable. You don't miss anything if you don't pay, but if you do pay, you feel like you got your money's worth. The game is loving boring and quite grindy, but the business model seems solid to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:vvv I don't get it I'm just making fun of us as we're paywall gated members here. High-brow humor, I know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:23
|
|
|
Doh004 posted:I'm just making fun of us as we're paywall gated members here. Something Awful, The MMO!
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
I don't know or even care if monthly MMOs are better or worse, but I do think its hilarious because they'll be getting less money out of me by charging each month. I absolutely cannot restrain myself when playing F2P games and I end up spending far more. I think I've spent like $250 on Planetside 2 so far, and on the next big PS2 sale I'll be spending even more money.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:40
|
|
|
I am personally okay with a subscription model, but they better be on the ball immediately with continuous content updates because with a constant guaranteed income stream from all of your customers, there is no excuse for slacking off in the current MMO marketplace.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:41
|
|
|
I've been casually interested in this game for a bit now, and was hoping they would either go with a 60$ one time fee and then F2P after that (guild wars) or no one time fee and a subscription model (Eve). This is literally the worst of both worlds and I'm not really interested in this anymore. I'll try the beta and if it's really something outstanding then I might bite, but they've shot themselves in the foot here pretty hard.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
Hugoon Chavez posted:Huh? What's wrong with rift's model? It's completely free, you only pay for convenience and the prices are actually pretty reasonable. You don't miss anything if you don't pay, but if you do pay, you feel like you got your money's worth. $5 for a god damned bag space on a single character = lovely as hell. Edit: That's not the only thing I found annoying with their F2P model, but it's the first that came to mind. Really I hate it when all the quality of life poo poo ends up costing a ridiculous amount of money. I honestly don't know where they come up with their prices, but it made the game amazingly lovely for me. Korlac fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
Korlac posted:$5 for a god damned bag space on a single character = lovely as hell. Because everything else is free? 1 bag + SL souls would cost you 15 bucks or so. Consider that your monthly sub. Then you'd never have to pay anything else again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 22:51
|
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Because everything else is free? 1 bag + SL souls would cost you 15 bucks or so. Consider that your monthly sub. Then you'd never have to pay anything else again. Still that's for a single character, which is just dumb. I'm not going to spin this thread further down the useless Rabbit/Duck season argument we've been circling the drain with. Sufficient to say I'd rather pay the sub rather than empty my wallet to fill in the quality of life features I enjoy having.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 23:07
|
|
|
Korlac posted:Still that's for a single character, which is just dumb. I'm not going to spin this thread further down the useless Rabbit/Duck season argument we've been circling the drain with. Sufficient to say I'd rather pay the sub rather than empty my wallet to fill in the quality of life features I enjoy having. I'm with this as well. I would rather pay a monthly fee and get full features than doing a cash optional (but not really optional) gimmick.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
Korlac posted:That's not the only thing I found annoying with their F2P model, but it's the first that came to mind. Really I hate it when all the quality of life poo poo ends up costing a ridiculous amount of money. I honestly don't know where they come up with their prices, but it made the game amazingly lovely for me. I think that a lot of stuff like this is a symptom of transitioning from sub to F2P. A great MMO that doesn't use a sub model and opts for a B2P model instead will give you a full game complete with quality of life features for the price of the box. If it is a full game like this then it won't feel like an "optional" (not really optional) cash shop. Most content updates will also be free and the cash shop will be continuously updated with stuff that people enjoy buying. The content updates are meant to keep the masses playing and tempt one to make purchases at the shop. This can be done really well if your plan is to make a B2P game from the ground up. It doesn't work as well with F2P. Converting from sub to F2P is more troublesome because overhauling your game to match the quality of an MMO that was B2P from the start is very difficult to do properly and expensive. When it comes to Wildstar, one must consider the fact that nearly every single MMO that has started with a sub model since 2004 has either died or transitioned to F2P. I'd rather Wildstar not screw up what appears to be a great game by making that same choice. One must also consider that no sub based MMO has ever consistently delivered on the promise of high quality content updates with lasting power every month before to the best of my knowledge. So really...what are the odds here? Xavier434 fucked around with this message at 23:22 on Aug 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:50 |
|
|
Stanley Pain posted:Because everything else is free? 1 bag + SL souls would cost you 15 bucks or so. Consider that your monthly sub. Then you'd never have to pay anything else again. That's not how most people see the F2P model though. I don't go into a F2P game, thinking alternatives are X$ so I am X$ ahead, and if I spend Y$ I am still paying less than I normally would have. What you said is true and in no way am I arguing against your point specifically, just that most people don't think that way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2013 23:35
|
|