should be f2p?

Valgar1

SInce LoTR has gone F2p and its a much bigger title to this point.  Do you think sony would ever go that route with this game? or are they happy with there few hundred ( maybe thousand ? ) paying subs.

Shoju

Originally posted by Valgar1

 or are they happy with there few hundred ( maybe thousand ? ) paying subs.

So Vanguard would do better with more people paying no money at all?

VirusDancer

There is no such thing as F2P.  We really need to stop referring to it as that, hyping that bogus jargon, and all the rest.

Rzep

Well there is practically no chance of the game bouncing back, becouse right now its barely supported. So going the cash shop route could reinvigorate the game and maybe even save it and get Sony to once more support and develop it. Though the game going f2p is unlikely to happen since its not as easy as snapping your fingers. Changing how the game works requires an initial investmen and if Sony sees the current interest in the game they might just choose to shut it down in the future rather then risk their money.

lOrdAYYapa

i played this game and got bored after 20 mins. F2p or whatever its a boring useless game.

Valgar1

Originally posted by Shoju

Originally posted by Valgar1

 or are they happy with there few hundred ( maybe thousand ? ) paying subs.

So Vanguard would do better with more people paying no money at all?

IAmMMO

Should be sold to another company keen to make the best of it first. SOE got it in limbo as more resources go to EQ2 instead.

IAmMMO

Originally posted by VirusDancer

There is no such thing as F2P.  We really need to stop referring to it as that, hyping that bogus jargon, and all the rest.

Free to Pick your pockets more!

ThomasN7

If they changed the business model to something like ArenaNet did with the original Guild Wars then I would be re-installing the game now and playing because there is no way I'm paying a monthly fee for this game.

warmaster670

Originally posted by VirusDancer

There is no such thing as F2P.  We really need to stop referring to it as that, hyping that bogus jargon, and all the rest.

If you can play it for free then its free to play, dont know why this is so hard for people to undestand.

Mardy

I'm not a f2p supporter.  When this subject was brought up 2 years ago, i was strongly against it.

 

But now, seeing that SOE has absolutely no interest at giving Vanguard the resources it needs to get better.  This includes money and dev resources to come out with an expansion, or to simply allow devs to pump out content at a faster rate.  Right now, I would say making Vanguard a hybrid f2p model that Turbine has adopted for their games would do the game wonders.  This means making the game f2p, but add in cash shops (which SOE is familiar with already, nothing new), and come out with paid content when enough players start playing the game.

 

The stubborn VG playerbase will say no to this until the game gets shut down.  But realize this, the fact is the game isn't doing well, it hasn't done well period.  Rumors of spikes in population or boost of new players are all just rumors.  The game was on a steady decline ever since launch.  There comes a time when you need to toss in the towel and see if something else might help the game out.

 

Two years ago I didn't think f2p would help Vanguard, but two years ago SOE still said they support Vanguard 100%.  They probably still say that now officially, but we all know when a game is merging all servers into one, and that discussion panels are pulled from SOE fan faires, the game is all but dropped from active development & support.  Do free 2 play, add in cash shops, and see if population increases.  If they do it right, they may come out successful and revive the game the way Turbine did with Dungeons & Dragons Online (and soon LOTR Online).

 

Seriously, it can't be any worse than the way it is right now.

Valgar1

Originally posted by Mardy

I'm not a f2p supporter.  When this subject was brought up 2 years ago, i was strongly against it.

 

But now, seeing that SOE has absolutely no interest at giving Vanguard the resources it needs to get better.  This includes money and dev resources to come out with an expansion, or to simply allow devs to pump out content at a faster rate.  Right now, I would say making Vanguard a hybrid f2p model that Turbine has adopted for their games would do the game wonders.  This means making the game f2p, but add in cash shops (which SOE is familiar with already, nothing new), and come out with paid content when enough players start playing the game.

 

The stubborn VG playerbase will say no to this until the game gets shut down.  But realize this, the fact is the game isn't doing well, it hasn't done well period.  Rumors of spikes in population or boost of new players are all just rumors.  The game was on a steady decline ever since launch.  There comes a time when you need to toss in the towel and see if something else might help the game out.

 

Two years ago I didn't think f2p would help Vanguard, but two years ago SOE still said they support Vanguard 100%.  They probably still say that now officially, but we all know when a game is merging all servers into one, and that discussion panels are pulled from SOE fan faires, the game is all but dropped from active development & support.  Do free 2 play, add in cash shops, and see if population increases.  If they do it right, they may come out successful and revive the game the way Turbine did with Dungeons & Dragons Online (and soon LOTR Online).

 

Seriously, it can't be any worse than the way it is right now.

I agree with this Mardy, well said.

Goldknyght

This game shouldnt be anything other then Canned like Matrix Online. And F2P model is a slap to all the people still keeping this pile afloat because it should of been F2P since feburary 27th, 2007. F2P model doesnt work on established games and if your F2P ur game will get no love PERIOD.

Kyroc

Originally posted by Goldknyght

 F2P model doesnt work on established games

 

You must know something that Turbine doesn't

Zeletor

Originally posted by Mardy

I'm not a f2p supporter.  When this subject was brought up 2 years ago, i was strongly against it.

 

But now, seeing that SOE has absolutely no interest at giving Vanguard the resources it needs to get better.  This includes money and dev resources to come out with an expansion, or to simply allow devs to pump out content at a faster rate.  Right now, I would say making Vanguard a hybrid f2p model that Turbine has adopted for their games would do the game wonders.  This means making the game f2p, but add in cash shops (which SOE is familiar with already, nothing new), and come out with paid content when enough players start playing the game.

 

The stubborn VG playerbase will say no to this until the game gets shut down.  But realize this, the fact is the game isn't doing well, it hasn't done well period.  Rumors of spikes in population or boost of new players are all just rumors.  The game was on a steady decline ever since launch.  There comes a time when you need to toss in the towel and see if something else might help the game out.

 

Two years ago I didn't think f2p would help Vanguard, but two years ago SOE still said they support Vanguard 100%.  They probably still say that now officially, but we all know when a game is merging all servers into one, and that discussion panels are pulled from SOE fan faires, the game is all but dropped from active development & support.  Do free 2 play, add in cash shops, and see if population increases.  If they do it right, they may come out successful and revive the game the way Turbine did with Dungeons & Dragons Online (and soon LOTR Online).

 

Seriously, it can't be any worse than the way it is right now.

Completely agree with this post.

gordiflu

Originally posted by Kyroc

Originally posted by Goldknyght

 F2P model doesnt work on established games

 

You must know something that Turbine doesn't

DDO went f2p becouse it was a major failure at launch.

Lotro is going f2p becouse it is failing big time, due to an alarming lack of content and updates.

sepher

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by Kyroc

Originally posted by Goldknyght

 F2P model doesnt work on established games

 

You must know something that Turbine doesn't

DDO went f2p becouse it was a major failure at launch.

Lotro is going f2p becouse it is failing big time, due to an alarming lack of content and updates.

 Then going free to play should work doubly well for Vanguard? It was a major failure at launch and is still failing now.

gordiflu

Originally posted by sepher

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by Kyroc

Originally posted by Goldknyght

 F2P model doesnt work on established games

 

You must know something that Turbine doesn't

DDO went f2p becouse it was a major failure at launch.

Lotro is going f2p becouse it is failing big time, due to an alarming lack of content and updates.

 Then going free to play should work doubly well for Vanguard? It was a major failure at launch and is still failing now.

You got a point there, nailed. It's so sad to say it, but you are right. Vanguard failed at launch and it is still failing, and it could have been the best MMO ever.

Unfortunately, I don't think the average f2p player is willing to play something so deep, complex and inmersive. I doubt going f2p would save the game anyway. The game is dead.. or at least agonizing, simple as. *claps at SOE*

NasherUK

LOTRO isn't actually going to be free.  If you want any useful features at all (even showing quests on your map) then you have to continue paying the subscription at the current price.

 

Vanguard was doomed from the start purly for being involved with SOE, it came out just after they ruined SWG and since then people won't play a game with an SOE logo on it (same thing happened to PotBS).  Like other big publishers (EA, Activision, etc) they only want money and don't really care about the actual game, so milk it as much as possible before abandoning it.  They would have probably done far better going indipendant like CCP.  Vanguard is pretty much dead now and shutdown might not be avoidable, even going free probably won't attract enough people.

rozenblade1

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by sepher

Originally posted by gordiflu

Originally posted by Kyroc

Originally posted by Goldknyght

 F2P model doesnt work on established games

 

You must know something that Turbine doesn't

DDO went f2p becouse it was a major failure at launch.

Lotro is going f2p becouse it is failing big time, due to an alarming lack of content and updates.

 Then going free to play should work doubly well for Vanguard? It was a major failure at launch and is still failing now.

You got a point there, nailed. It's so sad to say it, but you are right. Vanguard failed at launch and it is still failing, and it could have been the best MMO ever.

Unfortunately, I don't think the average f2p player is willing to play something so deep, complex and inmersive. I doubt going f2p would save the game anyway. The game is dead.. or at least agonizing, simple as. *claps at SOE*

 But...

Who knows how many players out there are like me and really would like to try VG but dont want to jump in and start paying for a game that could really just close any time.

I would rally like to play this, but I dont want to start a sub and pay for a few months just to have it shut down, that would be a waste of money because I wouldn't be able to even fully enjoy the game by then.  If it went f2p I would try it even if it were to shut down in 2 weeks.  There may be many others who feel the same way.