dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
39390
« MS buys Minecraft for $2.5B[Game] Bejeweled 3 Free! »
prev · 1 · 2 · 3 ... 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20 ... 36 · 37 · 38 · next

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

1 edit

TheBionic to Ast1

Premium Member

to Ast1

Re: Elder Scrolls Online Doomed?

said by Ast1 :

So making profit isn't hard, it just depends on how much is good enough. The problem is, becaue of the WoW effect which had an obscene amount of subscribers, companies seem to have unrealistic expectation on sub numbers and visions of crazy amounts of money that could bring.

I agree, but I don't think companies necessarily have these unrealistic expectations anymore. There are a ton of profitable MMOs that don't have WoW's numbers. Let's face it; no MMO as they now exist is likely to achieve WoW's numbers. But look at GW2, still releasing xpacs. LOTRO, still releasing xpacs. Rift, still going strong. This is the more realistic MMO market, not the OMFG IT DIDN'T KILL WOW IT SUCKS mentality of some gamers, and I don't think it's that difficult to achieve once you cover the initial investment.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

said by TheThing2:

Maybe they understand that having a sub forever is unrealistic. you would think so. so maybe their plan all along is just to break even the first year or two, switch to free to play, and then go from there.

This is what I think. They see the market trends the same way as we do. They're going to charge a sub and recoup as much of their initial investment as possible while the game's hot. If the player base will support the sub for the long term, that's great. If not, you can bet they will have a f2p model primed and ready to go. I'm guessing subs will drop off dramatically in the first six months and they'll implement it in a year or so.

This is what SWTOR did and again it comes down as to how you view it.

On one hand they netted all that cash from initial sales and subs, on the other admitting your game isn't popular enough to maintain a sub model is really bad publicity. All games will go f2p eventually but you want to be keeping the sub model going for as long as possible. An early switch to f2p makes the public assume the game is bad, plenty of people on these very forums refuse to play a f2p game, so the downward spiral continues. GW2 has managed to dodge this negative publicity by not requiring a sub in the first place. Anyone looking to play GW2 will only have the reviews to go on, and not the well publicised fall from sub to f2p.

Going back to SWTOR however, was it a success? It certainly shifted a fair few units in the first few months, and had subs running. The developers were probably happy with it.

My main concern with this sort of behavoir is that developers will literally stop giving it everything. At it's worst it could be a bad MMO relying on first month sales, but it could be something smaller like only planning updates for 6 months before calling it a day. All in all it shows to me that the developers care more about the money than the players, which is the wrong attitude to have. A good MMO with a fair pricing structure and regular updates will sell, however no developers are willing to invest in the time and effort required to make one, opting rather to cash in on early sales.

Uncle Paul
join:2003-02-04
USA

Uncle Paul to shinjuru

Member

to shinjuru
My guild currently has over 230 pre-orders which is waaaay more than the section that plans on playing Wildstar. While I found Wildstar humorous.. I can't do cartoony any more.. just won't do it.

For me it's just holding a spot for Star Citizen. Which, IMO, is really shattering the mold for MMOs and game development.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic to Cat5

Premium Member

to Cat5
said by Cat5:

This is what SWTOR did and again it comes down as to how you view it.

This is not what SWTOR did. From what I could tell, SWTOR thought they would do much better but the game sucked and it failed miserably. There is no indication that they had a f2p model primed and ready to go. If they did, they bungled its design, implementation and PR horribly. They locked down nearly every aspect of the game behind a paywall, and were rightly slammed for it.

ESO can avoid all of that bad PR by implementing a f2p model that makes sense and makes people want to play the game.

Edited because words are hard

Exodus
Your Daddy
Premium Member
join:2001-11-26
Earth

Exodus to TheBionic

Premium Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

I agree, but I don't think companies necessarily have these unrealistic expectations anymore. There are a ton of profitable MMOs that don't have WoW's numbers. Let's face it; no MMO as they now exist is likely to achieve WoW's numbers. But look at GW2, still releasing xpacs. LOTRO, still releasing xpacs. Rift, still going strong. This is the more realistic MMO market, not the OMFG IT DIDN'T KILL WOW IT SUCKS mentality of some gamers, and I don't think it's that difficult to achieve once you cover the initial investment.

Quoting this entire text because this is a very important shift in mentality from previous MMOs. Today's MMOs don't need to kill WoW to be successful. If they can be profitable with their smaller base of subscriptions, then they are successful.

The era of the mega-MMO has come to an end for now.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

ESO can avoid all of that bad PR by implementing a f2p model that makes sense and makes people want to play the game.

My point is a sub game going f2p isn't good PR whichever way you look at it. It's the developer admitting it's not as popular as they'd hoped.
said by TheBionic:

This is not what SWTOR did. From what I could tell, SWTOR thought they would do much better but the game sucked and it failed miserably. There is no indication that they had a f2p model primed and ready to go. If they did, they bungled its design, implementation and PR horribly. They locked down nearly every aspect of the game behind a paywall, and were rightly slammed for it.

It's exactly what they did. Whether it was on purpose or not isn't important, the fact that the vast bulk of the profit they made was gained in those first couple of months is. It showed other developers that the public will buy a game at full price and with a subscription, even if it's bad, as long as they make it look appealing (like sticking Star Wars on it).

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic

Premium Member

said by Cat5:

My point is a sub game going f2p isn't good PR whichever way you look at it. It's the developer admitting it's not as popular as they'd hoped.

And I'm just not sure that's 100% true anymore. f2p no longer means bad, and as has been pointed out, there are a number of successful games that successfully use f2p. Business models and gamer attitudes are changing in this regard. Does anyone (besides WoW fanboys that think because WoW is still successful every other MMO has failed) regard Rift as a 'bad' game? Or LOTRO as a 'bad' game? Those are both f2p that used to be sub based and still have strong followings.
said by Cat5:

It's exactly what they did. Whether it was on purpose or not isn't important,

It is important, as my argument stated that if ESO has planned for it they can make it work. SWTOR was blindsided and made the game WORSE by going f2p. They screwed up royally and owned every bid of negative publicity they got for that.

EDIT: And did they even make a profit off of those subs? I honestly don't know. I don't think they did, or if they did I don't think it was much of one. I remember articles stating SWTOR was a HUGE disappointment financially, hence the panic switch to f2p.
TheBionic

TheBionic

Premium Member

And sorry to double post, but you have to realize the MMO model, and the gaming public, was pretty different when SWTOR hit the shelves. A sub was expected then, and f2p meant Rise of Conan quality. GW2 changed the game substantially. ESO is getting a lot of flak for charging a sub at all. People EXPECT f2p games now, or at least an initial purchase with no sub. f2p no longer means low quality in the minds of a lot of gamers.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

And I'm just not sure that's 100% true anymore. f2p no longer means bad, and as has been pointed out, there are a number of successful games that successfully use f2p. Business models and gamer attitudes are changing in this regard. Does anyone (besides WoW fanboys that think because WoW is still successful every other MMO has failed) regard Rift as a 'bad' game? Or LOTRO as a 'bad' game? Those are both f2p that used to be sub based and still have strong followings.

F2p has never ever meant bad. Unlike a lot of people on this forum I won't refuse to play a game if it's f2p and I'll readily admit that some of the best games are f2p. My point is based soley on the perception generated when a game goes f2p from having previous had a subscription. It's like seeing a newish DVD in the bargain bin, it may be a film which really appeals to you and your tastes, but the fact it's in that bargain bin suggests the masses don't agree.

RIFT and LOTRO are different scenarios. RIFT is still suffering today from the bad reputation it got for having to ditch the subs model. People on these forums view it as a failure and won't even entertain the thought of playing it when it really isn't a bad game and the f2p model works really well. The damage has been done though. LOTRO however only went f2p when it reached the end of it's natural life. It had a good 3 and half years with a succesfull sub model which for the era it was launched was very good. Again GW2 suffers from none of these perceptions, as it always has been free.
said by TheBionic:

It is important, as my argument stated that if ESO has planned for it they can make it work. SWTOR was blindsided and made the game WORSE by going f2p. They screwed up royally and owned every bid of negative publicity they got for tat.

ESO can't change people's perceptions though. If the sub model is dropped too early then people will assume it's a bad game regardless of f2p model ala RIFT. The hardcore will say f2p = noobs and jump to the next MMO whilst slating it on forums across the Internet increasing the possible wrong perceptions people have.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic

Premium Member

said by Cat5:

My point is based soley on the perception generated when a game goes f2p from having previous had a subscription.

And my point is that those perceptions are changing and that ESO is getting a lot of guff for even charging a sub. People no longer see f2p as low quality.
said by Cat5:

RIFT is still suffering today from the bad reputation it got for having to ditch the subs model. People on these forums view it as a failure and won't even entertain the thought of playing it when it really isn't a bad game and the f2p model works really well. The damage has been done though.

It has? I have never gotten that impression, either from the gaming media or from users here. Sure, there have been one or two users that say they won't play ANY f2p game, but those gamers are in the minority, and frankly it's their loss.
said by Cat5:

If the sub model is dropped too early then people will assume it's a bad game regardless of f2p model ala RIFT.

Again, I don't know anyone that thinks Rift is a bad game, and I disagree that people will think that of ESO if they drop the sub. You are simply ignoring changing attitudes in the MMO space while trying to predict the future, and that doesn't jibe with what is likely to happen IMO.

Regardless of perception, though, MMOs like Rift and LOTRO have shown that a good f2p model can indeed make a game successful. I'm sure Zenimax will keep that in mind and plan accordingly.

Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI

Nightfall

MVM

said by TheBionic:

Again, I don't know anyone that thinks Rift is a bad game, and I disagree that people will think that of ESO if they drop the sub. You are simply ignoring changing attitudes in the MMO space while trying to predict the future, and that doesn't jibe with what is likely to happen IMO.

Regardless of perception, though, MMOs like Rift and LOTRO have shown that a good f2p model can indeed make a game successful. I'm sure Zenimax will keep that in mind and plan accordingly.

I will say that public perception is changing. The MMOs that have gone F2P have in the past gotten crappy media coverage. The media will continue to do the same thing today because its easy to point out the failures of a game or say they made the wrong choice.

That being said, F2P doesn't carry a negative stigma with it anymore. Look at great games like Path of Exile for instance. That game was incredible, and I know I paid for more bank slots as a result of that game being good. That game has a very loyal following.

I do agree when you say that it all depends on how it is implemented. For instance, if Zenimax decides to implement F2P in a intelligent way, then the gamers will stay.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic

Premium Member

said by Nightfall:

Look at great games like Path of Exile for instance. That game was incredible, and I know I paid for more bank slots as a result of that game being good.

Ha, me too. I even bought some of the cosmetic weapon and armor effects just to support the dev. That game is awesome and is truly f2p, as in you never have to invest a dime if you don't want to. Ironically I know I've spent more than $60 on that game.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

And my point is that those perceptions are changing and that ESO is getting a lot of guff for even charging a sub. People no longer see f2p as low quality.

The sub isn't an issue. F2p isn't an issue. It's the changing from sub to f2p early on which is.
said by TheBionic:

It has? I have never gotten that impression, either from the gaming media or from users here. Sure, there have been one or two users that say they won't play ANY f2p game, but those gamers are in the minority, and frankly it's their loss.

Yeah RIFT has. Go and check out the RIFT thread here and you'll see lots of players only checking RIFT out again after reading the post, myself included. Until reading that thread I was under the perception that RIFT failed and was a bad MMO purely because it was sub and went to f2p. I told my guildies on WoW I was playing RIFT, and they too thought it was a bad MMO.
said by TheBionic:

Again, I don't know anyone that thinks Rift is a bad game, and I disagree that people will think that of ESO if they drop the sub. You are simply ignoring changing attitudes in the MMO space while trying to predict the future, and that doesn't jibe with what is likely to happen IMO.

Again you're missing my point. RIFT isn't a bad game, but peoples perceptions of it are bad as they had to drop the sub model. As soon as anyone actually plays the f2p version it becomes clear that it is a great game and doesn't suffer at all from the switch. Myself and the guildies who played RIFT at launch all thought RIFT was bad until we were told otherwise. How many other old subscribers are under that same impression? As for future predictions, obviously no one can. What we can do though is look to recent MMO's with similar structures and see how they fare to make an educated guess as to what will happen. As it stands that is basically f2p within 6 months and its reputaion being dealt a massive blow. As I've said GW2 has none of these issues, there are no perceptions of failure as a gamer can only make judgement on reviews.
liquoranne
join:2009-01-14

liquoranne to shinjuru

Member

to shinjuru
I will agree with Cat's perception of Rift. As someone who blew the game off when it initially released, i was very hesitant to trying it out once it went f2p. A sub base game that loses so much popularity that it is forced into a f2p model doesnt sit well with me. Am i spending a lot of time on a game that i will regret due to lack of end game? I had that experience with SWTOR, and for that i will never pick it up regardless of their model. With ESO, i am taking a safer route which i will let the initial "hype train" pass and then see where they are heading. Until then, i have plenty of games to waste time on that cost nothing yet offer everything i need in a game.

Uncle Paul
join:2003-02-04
USA

Uncle Paul to Cat5

Member

to Cat5
What makes a bad game vs just the perception of a bad game? At what point does perception become reality? Is the perception wrong? Who decides? You may feel the perception is unwarranted and the game's great. I may feel the perception is warranted because it's a boring game.

However, you can't blame people for having the idea that a sub based game going F2P has either had some issues, or the game itself is unable to generate enough interest using a subscription based model and doing something different. In either case I don't feel it's uncommon for players to question the quality of the game. Valid or not.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

1 edit

TheBionic to Cat5

Premium Member

to Cat5
We'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole 'perceptions' argument, and whether or not it matters to a game's success. We're just repeating ourselves over and over.
said by Cat5:

I told my guildies on WoW I was playing RIFT, and they too thought it was a bad MMO.

No offense, but I'm not surprised a WoW guild has a negative view of another MMO. Frankly, if they had a very positive view of another MMO, they'd probably play it and therefore not be a WoW guild anymore. I must have missed the RIFT thread you're talking about here.

EDIT: That Rift thread is literally like two threads down for this one. I must have some kind of debuff active today, resulting in -3 perception. I'll go check it out.

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5

Member

said by TheBionic:

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole 'perceptions' argument, and whether or not it matters to a game's success. We're just repeating ourselves over and over.

Indeed. I think you come from a gaming background so you have your finger on the pulse of whats hot and whats not. I'm just a very casual gamer, so get the majority of my information on games from the media and don't have the insider information to go on.

Nightfall
My Goal Is To Deny Yours
MVM
join:2001-08-03
Grand Rapids, MI

Nightfall

MVM

said by Cat5:

said by TheBionic:

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the whole 'perceptions' argument, and whether or not it matters to a game's success. We're just repeating ourselves over and over.

Indeed. I think you come from a gaming background so you have your finger on the pulse of whats hot and whats not. I'm just a very casual gamer, so get the majority of my information on games from the media and don't have the insider information to go on.

The perceptions and opinions we form are not only drawn from experience, but from what others tell us and what we read. The best perceptions are those that we draw personally from direct experience. The worst perceptions are drawn from those we read or get from others. After all, external perceptions are not direct. Far too often we read a negative review on a game and then just assume that is the way things are without looking into it ourselves.

Rift and SWTOR are examples of two great games that went F2P but got a lot of bad press. As a result, many in the gaming community haven't dove into them because of the negative hype. This is amazing to me because these games have been F2P for a long time now and why people haven't played them is very surprising to me. Its not like they are out any money by trying them.

This is why I always stress people try the games, but I also push game studios to release demos of their games. The demos themselves will push people to try the game that they are selling. Why they aren't releasing demos anymore is just crazy.

Then I saw some stats in a Ted talk a year ago. If a studio releases a cool looking trailer or movie intro to a game, the game sells better. That just shocks the hell out of me.

Ah well.....

Cat5
join:2013-04-26

Cat5 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

No offense, but I'm not surprised a WoW guild has a negative view of another MMO. Frankly, if they had a very positive view of another MMO, they'd probably play it and therefore not be a WoW guild anymore. I must have missed the RIFT thread you're talking about here.

I misclicked so double post.

To be honest I don't think the vast majority of WoW players have much allegiance to WoW. Myself and the friends I play with certainly don't, we play it as it is familiar and because there is nothing better.

We all tried RIFT on the free trial and a good few people left WoW briefly for it, but they returned as the playerbase wasn't there. At the time I was having fun on WoW but had I not been, I'd have signed up too. None of us subbed to SWTOR though, it was far too expensive a risk for an MMO few of us really cared for. All of us bought GW2, and two of our number went to it full time. Of those that are left we are all looking for other MMO's, but there just isn't anything affordable and/or guaranteed to be good out there.

I'm happy to bad mouth WoW when it deserves it, but the truth is it does get a hell of a lot of things right and offers pretty decent value for money, at least for a casual player.
TheThing2
join:2014-03-05
New Haven, CT

TheThing2 to shinjuru

Member

to shinjuru
GW2 full time for me, with Rift and Tera as my alternate mmorpgs... only if I am temporarly burnt on gw2.

I wish WoW would just sell a life time subscription cost, $300 for life or something, then I would play it forever

WoW is extremely polished, and toony, and addictive, WoW is the best mmorpg out right now however...

GW2 + Free > WoW

monchis
Premium Member
join:2002-12-09
00000

monchis to shinjuru

Premium Member

to shinjuru
Does it bother anyone else that in ESO you don't see peoples names on top of their toons? I can't tell who's npc (unless obvious) and who's human.

Ast1
@80.79.208.x

Ast1

Anon

Rifts downfall was less to do with turning F2P and more to do with the large cries of 'WoW clone' that were flooding the web. Most people weren't intersted in Rift when it went F2P because of already having been in the game or put off by these claims - which also highlights something very important, people talk about how they would play if a game was sub free, yet clearly that isn't necessarilly the case.

LOTRO, Rift are indeed great F2P games, but that is primarily because it was designed as a sub game - there is a clear quality difference in a game designed to be sub and one to be F2P.
Even Angry Joe (who I am not much of a fan of and tend to disagree with his stuff, including this review) pointed that out on his initial review 'as a sub game it isn't great, but if it were F2P it would be the BEST F2P game around'

GW2 is an example of an MMO designed without a sub, probably the best there is, and it is great that it is so popular, but ultimately it is a very bland game, everyone I know only managed up to about 2 months max before they just had to stop playing even though it was free because it was just so...beige.
For a game without a sub it is good, but it is still very OBVIOUSLY a game designed without a sub and playing something like Rift or any other ex-sub game tends to be a far superior experience - anyone playing GW2 simply because it is free I would strongly recommend go try out Rift, even though I don't play it anymore, it is a very good game.

So even if ESO does go F2P (which they shouldn't because even after mass drop off they will have plenty of subs for profit, as mentioned in previous post) I will be glad it started as a sub model, it isn't just a money grabbing scheme, it genuinely produces a better quality game as far as I am concerned.

--------
Monchis, no it doesn't bother me - because if you go into settings you can select to have players health bars above their heads at all times which achieves the same thing a name would in that it is easy to differentiate NPC and player

Mcrobrewer
Premium Member
join:2001-03-04
Trenton, NJ

Mcrobrewer to monchis

Premium Member

to monchis
said by monchis:

Does it bother anyone else that in ESO you don't see peoples names on top of their toons? I can't tell who's npc (unless obvious) and who's human.

I was thinking the same thing. While more "immersing" it does become annoying at times.

If another beta rolls around I will play it... but as of now I am not interested in paying for this game as frankly there is nothing "ground breaking" about it....

I LOL'ed when someone in game chat said the leveling system in the game was "revolutionary"... when I asked them to explain they could not. LOL
TheThing2
join:2014-03-05
New Haven, CT

TheThing2 to shinjuru

Member

to shinjuru
"im going to start my new years revolution"... oh no!?!

Most people quit GW2 in my opinion because they don't give it enough time, and they try to play it like other mmos, like WoW... and in GW2 you need to set your own goals, or you will be lost without a purpose. Goals in GW2 are more horizontal than vertical, and many people just cant adjust their brains

GW2 is no sandbox, but similar to a sandbox it is what you make of it, I don't think people understand it, or get it, but once you wrap your mind around it, it's great, mmorpgs don't have to be set on rails... WoW ruined the genre

Rift and Tera are great, but they are far inferior to GW2
macdude22
join:2005-09-08
IA

macdude22 to TheBionic

Member

to TheBionic
said by TheBionic:

This is not what SWTOR did. From what I could tell, SWTOR thought they would do much better but the game sucked and it failed miserably.

It didn't suck, it was a great single player bioware game! I bought it at launch, chewed up all that meaty bioware story for a couple months and never touched it again.
Vinceruos
join:2011-05-04
Dumfries, VA

Vinceruos to shinjuru

Member

to shinjuru
So many GW2 fanboys on this site. Lol its pretty hilarious. That game is aweful, please stop citing it as a "success". If GW2/F2P is the "future"of gaming/MMORPGs, I will shoot myself.
Shatter13
join:2006-07-24
Waterford, MI

Shatter13

Member

GW2 was fun until "end game" which there wasnt any. Im one of those people who prefers carrots and GW2 lacked that.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

TheBionic to macdude22

Premium Member

to macdude22
said by macdude22:

said by TheBionic:

This is not what SWTOR did. From what I could tell, SWTOR thought they would do much better but the game sucked and it failed miserably.

It didn't suck, it was a great single player bioware game! I bought it at launch, chewed up all that meaty bioware story for a couple months and never touched it again.

I was enjoying the story, I'll give you that, but I couldn't stomach the questing or combat, which is my gripe with most MMOs. Which is probably why I lean more toward games like GW2 and ESO than WoW or SWTOR. I still got sick of GW2's combat, but it took a bit longer, and ESO looks to add more variety and a more personalized feel. I can't get past level 20 on WoW before I'm bored out of my skull, and the same thing happened to me in SWTOR. I got to Tattooine and just ran out of steam.

Koil
Premium Member
join:2002-09-10
Irmo, SC

1 edit

1 recommendation

Koil to Vinceruos

Premium Member

to Vinceruos
said by Vinceruos:

So many GW2 fanboys on this site. Lol its pretty hilarious. That game is aweful, please stop citing it as a "success". If GW2/F2P is the "future"of gaming/MMORPGs, I will shoot myself.

GW2 IS THE FUTURE OF GAMING. BEST GAME EVER.

It IS a success, you troll...the fact that it rubs you so badly is hilarious. Your bitter tears of discontent are delicious.




Edited for deliciousness.

TheBionic
Funkier than a mohair disco ball.
Premium Member
join:2009-07-06
united state

2 recommendations

TheBionic to Vinceruos

Premium Member

to Vinceruos
said by Vinceruos:

If GW2/F2P is the "future"of gaming/MMORPGs, I will shoot myself.