Well, for what its worth, if dear old Smed said the sky was blue, I'd go outside and check, just to be on the safe side... ^^ While I agree that AAA titles keep getting more expensive, thats a trend thats going to intersect with the expanding capabilities of middle ware in the not too distant future.
Once they advance to a certain point, much smaller teams will be able to handle these complex suites of apps, much more time effectively (which translates to less money required up front). There is also the reality of the expansion of "smart" tools within the software realm. But both subjects would be worth serveral extensive articles in and of themselves,
As I've often stated, I really do not care what business model a game uses, just so long as its entertaining. P2P, F2P, B2P, or some hybrid is all the same to me, if I enjoy the game. I actually WANT the Dev's to be rewarded for their hard work. Thats the best way to see the game continue, and perhaps get expanded.
if TOR succeeds i look for a dragon age or maybe mass effect mmo to be in the works maybe someday a morrowind mmo if thats the case all three would be prime subscription based and probably do very well
interesting... so there is no chance of having a 300 on 300 pvp in open world? or seeing 300+ people in a capital city?
Nice to see more people thinking this way . I'd brought up the prospect of lower priced subscriptions (and some sort of hyrbrid freemium model) in these forums years ago . At the time I got shouted down by the majority of people saying they would be happy to even more than 15 dollars for an mmo and that it should never be reduced . I think a lot of gamers really did live on cloud nine most of the time back then but with a western free to play model coming along and working well (and the guild wars B2P model for that matter )attitudes seam to be changing .
StarWars could be the last big budget mmo ( along side others already indevelopment ) depending how well it does . A lot rides on the current crops success of faliure at least in the short term . Should they fail investment in big budget mmos will proberbly cease for quite a while and if thats the case most likly Warcraft will dominate the mmorpg landscape for the next decade ot so sadly .
The level of trolling these days before a release of new mmo really can destroy it based on nothing other than rumour which is pretty sad . Ultimatly this sort of trolling activity will be bad even for the trolls because they'll find when they get bored or grow out of the game they are trying to protect ( and in many cases that game is Warcraft ) they will find a bleak mmo landscape when looking for an alternative game .
"Is it realistic to think that after moving both DDO and LotRO away from their monthly fee-based roots, Turbine will return to that approach with a new game?"
Why not? Both titles started out as subscription models, and had years of post-launch development. That, I believe, is the reason they saw such a success on the conversion.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
If you hadn't read the books, the original movie wasn't that bad.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
SWTOR is a MCOG (Multi-Player Coop Online Game), not a Massively-Multiplayer Online Game.
I'll bite.... and what is your reasoning/proof of this?
Just from all the game-play footage and mechanics Bioware provided; that is all. Nothing more, nothing less. Not that it's a bad thing, but I think this overlap of definitions that become more misleading about the core game-play mechanics of one supposed mmorpg to the next, just needs some clarity about what we're actually talking about.
So in addition to my "No", I'd say it could be the last really big-budget MCOG.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but TOR most definately is an MMORPG
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
If big-budget single player games do fine just with boxes sold income (GTA IV $100 million budget) why not MMORPGs, that rely on Box + Fee?
MMORPGs have another edge over single player PC gaming, Piracy is not a problem here.
At the end (in my opinion) all comes down to this though:
-Potential costumers you are aiming for (Big-budget aiming at a niche genre/market is a recipe for short term bankrupcy even if the game is good, unless the company has the patiente and $ to hold until long term profit arrives).
-Quality of the final product matching the budget spent on it (an expensive fail is still a fail)
i play like +200 F2P games and the ar all total CRAP no way arr rund it -- to many kids and hacks and then cash shop just total fuk op the game all the time -- i dont get it ppl got ar PC and the got internet but the dont got 12-15$ to pay for a game lol lol then stop play or get ar fuk JOB or som ting -- F2P games ar kill the game world wed all the CRAP games the make -- arr real gamer got the 12-15$ or more to play the games he likes and get- Quality - games and servers ---- at thes time i am pay for 2 P2P -- no way i am goen to play arr F2P game argend -- if u cant pay 12-15$ to play ar game then u ar bether OFF get u selv ar XBOX360 or PS3 or som ting els ------ NO MORE F2P games
If you hadn't read the books, the original movie wasn't that bad.
The original Dune book is to science-fiction what Lord of the Rings was to fantasy. Saying "Oh yeah, I loved those Lord of the Rings movies" without seeming to be aware that they were a book first is blasphemy in some circles, the same goes for Dune.
interesting... so there is no chance of having a 300 on 300 pvp in open world? or seeing 300+ people in a capital city?
No.
Ahh ok I see now .... thanks for the clarification.... LOL see everything I have read seen and been told by guild members and friends in beta says different.
Now don't get me wrong they have things they dislike about the game... but saying it is not an MMO is simply not true...
Same here, people just like to spout of misinformation and then claim "NDA".
I'm not terribly positive about SWTOR, but I have to agree. It's a WoW clone, how can it not be an MMO?
The Secret World will have both a monthly sub, and microtransactions.
No thanks!
I want games that are P2P to ensure quality patches / updates, and possible expansions, or B2P (without pay to win)
Locking content from me, and trying to nickle n' dime me to pay even more than the box / game, AND a sub, - I find that disgusting.
I got nothing against F2P, and cash shops, as long as it's not Pay 2 Win.
I think it's an awesome way of getting more people together and do what we enjoy most, playing games together, but if the company shows no respect for it's customers, then I pack my sh*t and find another game to play.
I dont think that SW:TOR will be the last big budget MMO. F2P is ok but the support and lack of content for those that just want to play for free will still fuel the P2P MMO's
I think Turbine have a decent even balance between F2P and P2P. You get to play for free but can buy extra content if you wish or you can subscribe and get it all free anyway, with added bonuses. I prefer this model more as it gives you a choice. Eve Online is very close to this with its PLEX system. Where you can exchange ISK for PLEX and therefore not need to pay a monthly subscription fee.
Personaly I am loosing intrest in SW:TOR already and its not even out yet, the game I am really looking forward to is The Secret World.
Beazt has it exactly right. One of the problems with F2P is the sense that people get of the game being purposely broken so that you need to "pay" to play the fixed version. The other problem is of course Pay2win which is often closely related to Pay2fix. The other form of pay2fix is where they only deliver part of a game and you need to pay2finish EQ2X does this now with limiting people from the most recent expansion unless they pay a subscription for their F2P game. This is a bit different from what GW does since each campaign sold could be played to max level and you could simply stick with that one if you wanted. In other worlds, the optional content was really optional and not simply an artificial limitation to what amounted to a very extended trial.
Ultimately, people don't care how they pay so much as they want to avoid feeling screwed over. F2P is a lot like going to a casino. It is, more or less a way to prey on the unweary. Of course they are responsible for themselves and if they get taken most, including myself will give them no sympathy. But ethics is not a zero sum game. Just because the buy should beware doesn't mean that the seller is doing a good and right thing.
The question I have been mulling around lately is, can a game be F2P but structured in such a way that it doesn't take advantage of or encourage the "brokeness" of its game in order to generate greater revenue? Is it possible to run a casino that doesn't manipulate its customers into gambling more than they should or take advantage of people with addictions? I think it is, but I am not certain how it would manifest itself.
As for Smedly, he has drunk the wine of F2P profits and appears to like it very, very much. He is moving his company in a very F2P direction so, of course he is going to believe that F2P is the way of the future. He is far from a neutral observer. He not only has a dog in that race, he has several.
I don't like the F2P model at all and I won't continue to play MMO's if it becomes the only choice we have. I think all the companies that have gone F2P, usually do it on their deathbed and I think it would be even SMARTER for them to continue to give players a subscription, P2P option in addition to the F2P models they've adopted. I have a lifetime sub to Lotro and recently went back to check in on the new content and I didn't like the way the flavor of the game had changed. I'm not sure I'll ever return.
Knowing Sony's greed and seeing how they've structured Free Realms with the hungry cash shop.... and knowing Planetside is a pvp game- I can't see how they're going to make money without making the game unfair. How are they going to have a lucrative enough cash shop without turning the game into a 'pay to win' model? Are players really going to be that interested in 'cosmetic' items in Planetside? We played the old planetside with pretty abhorrent graphics and didn't mind... why is someone going to pay for paint for their Mosquito?
If Smedley is known for anything, he's known for his ridiculously awful business decisions. I am hoping this crap he's spewing is just more of the same. If he wasn't making money on F2P, he probably wouldn't be making money at all. He can't compete, SOE can't compete. What else is he going to say?
I think there will be more MMO's released using the B2P model, with cash shop. This gets over the hurdle of recouping costs, as you get the inital influx of cash from box sales. If the game is successful then this alone shuold cover the development costs then the cash shop and future box sales are all profit
Another alternative is games starting off as F2P and then moving to a subscription model. I know this seems backwards to many, including me, but as it says in the OP:
If you happen to have $50 million, $100 million or more available, would you put all your proverbial eggs in one basket or fund multiple initiatives so as to spread the risk across a portfolio? And let's not forget that if one of them takes off, it can be expanded faster by allocating ongoing development resources accordingly.
So. Release a game as F2P with a cash shop. If it takes off then they can develop it further and faster then offer a freemium type subscription, then use the funds raised to develop and expand the game further to a stage where you can start charging a full subscription
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Originally posted by Rinna If Smedley is known for anything, he's known for his ridiculously awful business decisions. I am hoping this crap he's spewing is just more of the same. If he wasn't making money on F2P, he probably wouldn't be making money at all. He can't compete, SOE can't compete. What else is he going to say?
Hahaha, its funny because its true
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Yes, because after Gone with the Wind was made, not a single big-budget movie was ever made again.
Oh.... wait....
I think it's a good question. How profitable is the typical big budget MMO? I'm not sure, but I think an increasing amount of studio's are wary of invensting the mega-dollars to try to duplicate WoW's colossal success. It's like an infomercial for a home-gym...you see these ripped and buff dudes and go, "Yeah, I wanna be buff too!" and you discover that all it's good for is hanging laundry. Apparently MMO's don't print their own money.
I think it's a good question. How profitable is the typical big budget MMO? I'm not sure, but I think an increasing amount of studio's are wary of invensting the mega-dollars to try to duplicate WoW's colossal success.
That's the thing, we all know this to be true, but they STILL to this day spend tons and tons and tons of money on big blockbuster movies even though only a couple of them ever actually are good and win awards.
They MUST still make money.
But movies don't have to retain subscribers and keep servers running, they just pump out sequels.
The ones that "make it" have no problem and the ones who don't either go F2P or shut down.
It's "facts of life" kind of stuff, not really a debate here.
Well, to be brief, i do believe P2P model is pretty much dead, if for no other reason than that the bandwidth/server costs that were used to justify it are now largely gone.
This leaves us with TWO (not one, Smedley) models that are about to slug it out in the online arena.
One is the much touted F2P model and the other is B2P throwback to the olden times.
I don't know about you guys, but I do prefer the classical model. I find F2P creepy and at the moment I'm expected to pay money for something that is advertised as "free" I get this creepy feeling (like when you meet that nice guy in a night club who offers you "something" for free) and I bug out. On the other hand, I'll happily play a demo (or a screwed up single-player pirate version) and then proudly cough up 50+ bucks for the full game if I find it worth it (and I do, more often than not).
So... IMO P2P is gone. I'll do B2P and even pay up for funny hats in F2P occasionally (but ONLY funny hats. No guns) But my bet is on B2P. I find full F2P just too creepy and ultimately no fun at all.
Comments
Well, for what its worth, if dear old Smed said the sky was blue, I'd go outside and check, just to be on the safe side... ^^ While I agree that AAA titles keep getting more expensive, thats a trend thats going to intersect with the expanding capabilities of middle ware in the not too distant future.
Once they advance to a certain point, much smaller teams will be able to handle these complex suites of apps, much more time effectively (which translates to less money required up front). There is also the reality of the expansion of "smart" tools within the software realm. But both subjects would be worth serveral extensive articles in and of themselves,
As I've often stated, I really do not care what business model a game uses, just so long as its entertaining. P2P, F2P, B2P, or some hybrid is all the same to me, if I enjoy the game. I actually WANT the Dev's to be rewarded for their hard work. Thats the best way to see the game continue, and perhaps get expanded.
John Smedley could say the sky is blue and I wouldn't even believe him.
if TOR succeeds i look for a dragon age or maybe mass effect mmo to be in the works maybe someday a morrowind mmo if thats the case all three would be prime subscription based and probably do very well
Nice to see more people thinking this way . I'd brought up the prospect of lower priced subscriptions (and some sort of hyrbrid freemium model) in these forums years ago . At the time I got shouted down by the majority of people saying they would be happy to even more than 15 dollars for an mmo and that it should never be reduced . I think a lot of gamers really did live on cloud nine most of the time back then but with a western free to play model coming along and working well (and the guild wars B2P model for that matter )attitudes seam to be changing .
StarWars could be the last big budget mmo ( along side others already indevelopment ) depending how well it does . A lot rides on the current crops success of faliure at least in the short term . Should they fail investment in big budget mmos will proberbly cease for quite a while and if thats the case most likly Warcraft will dominate the mmorpg landscape for the next decade ot so sadly .
The level of trolling these days before a release of new mmo really can destroy it based on nothing other than rumour which is pretty sad . Ultimatly this sort of trolling activity will be bad even for the trolls because they'll find when they get bored or grow out of the game they are trying to protect ( and in many cases that game is Warcraft ) they will find a bleak mmo landscape when looking for an alternative game .
The article specifically discusses big-budget MMOs with a subscription model.
GW2 won't have subscriptions.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
"Is it realistic to think that after moving both DDO and LotRO away from their monthly fee-based roots, Turbine will return to that approach with a new game?"
Why not? Both titles started out as subscription models, and had years of post-launch development. That, I believe, is the reason they saw such a success on the conversion.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
If you hadn't read the books, the original movie wasn't that bad.
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
Sorry to burst your bubble, but TOR most definately is an MMORPG
A creative person is motivated by the desire to achieve, not the desire to beat others.
Don't think so.
If big-budget single player games do fine just with boxes sold income (GTA IV $100 million budget) why not MMORPGs, that rely on Box + Fee?
MMORPGs have another edge over single player PC gaming, Piracy is not a problem here.
At the end (in my opinion) all comes down to this though:
-Potential costumers you are aiming for (Big-budget aiming at a niche genre/market is a recipe for short term bankrupcy even if the game is good, unless the company has the patiente and $ to hold until long term profit arrives).
-Quality of the final product matching the budget spent on it (an expensive fail is still a fail)
i play like +200 F2P games and the ar all total CRAP no way arr rund it -- to many kids and hacks and then cash shop just total fuk op the game all the time -- i dont get it ppl got ar PC and the got internet but the dont got 12-15$ to pay for a game lol lol then stop play or get ar fuk JOB or som ting -- F2P games ar kill the game world wed all the CRAP games the make -- arr real gamer got the 12-15$ or more to play the games he likes and get- Quality - games and servers ---- at thes time i am pay for 2 P2P -- no way i am goen to play arr F2P game argend -- if u cant pay 12-15$ to play ar game then u ar bether OFF get u selv ar XBOX360 or PS3 or som ting els ------ NO MORE F2P games
if u cant pay then dont play
WE NEED QUALITY games= P2P is the way
no crap games -F2P- it is and all ways CRAP
I surelly hope that Warhammer 40K: Dark Millenium will not be a low budge F2P when it launches in 2013/14
.|.. ..|. Smedley
The original Dune book is to science-fiction what Lord of the Rings was to fantasy. Saying "Oh yeah, I loved those Lord of the Rings movies" without seeming to be aware that they were a book first is blasphemy in some circles, the same goes for Dune.
I'm not terribly positive about SWTOR, but I have to agree. It's a WoW clone, how can it not be an MMO?
Not true. There are private not official servers for every MMO under the sun.
What this guy said!
I dont think that SW:TOR will be the last big budget MMO. F2P is ok but the support and lack of content for those that just want to play for free will still fuel the P2P MMO's
I think Turbine have a decent even balance between F2P and P2P. You get to play for free but can buy extra content if you wish or you can subscribe and get it all free anyway, with added bonuses. I prefer this model more as it gives you a choice. Eve Online is very close to this with its PLEX system. Where you can exchange ISK for PLEX and therefore not need to pay a monthly subscription fee.
Personaly I am loosing intrest in SW:TOR already and its not even out yet, the game I am really looking forward to is The Secret World.
Beazt has it exactly right. One of the problems with F2P is the sense that people get of the game being purposely broken so that you need to "pay" to play the fixed version. The other problem is of course Pay2win which is often closely related to Pay2fix. The other form of pay2fix is where they only deliver part of a game and you need to pay2finish EQ2X does this now with limiting people from the most recent expansion unless they pay a subscription for their F2P game. This is a bit different from what GW does since each campaign sold could be played to max level and you could simply stick with that one if you wanted. In other worlds, the optional content was really optional and not simply an artificial limitation to what amounted to a very extended trial.
Ultimately, people don't care how they pay so much as they want to avoid feeling screwed over. F2P is a lot like going to a casino. It is, more or less a way to prey on the unweary. Of course they are responsible for themselves and if they get taken most, including myself will give them no sympathy. But ethics is not a zero sum game. Just because the buy should beware doesn't mean that the seller is doing a good and right thing.
The question I have been mulling around lately is, can a game be F2P but structured in such a way that it doesn't take advantage of or encourage the "brokeness" of its game in order to generate greater revenue? Is it possible to run a casino that doesn't manipulate its customers into gambling more than they should or take advantage of people with addictions? I think it is, but I am not certain how it would manifest itself.
As for Smedly, he has drunk the wine of F2P profits and appears to like it very, very much. He is moving his company in a very F2P direction so, of course he is going to believe that F2P is the way of the future. He is far from a neutral observer. He not only has a dog in that race, he has several.
All die, so die well.
I don't like the F2P model at all and I won't continue to play MMO's if it becomes the only choice we have. I think all the companies that have gone F2P, usually do it on their deathbed and I think it would be even SMARTER for them to continue to give players a subscription, P2P option in addition to the F2P models they've adopted. I have a lifetime sub to Lotro and recently went back to check in on the new content and I didn't like the way the flavor of the game had changed. I'm not sure I'll ever return.
Knowing Sony's greed and seeing how they've structured Free Realms with the hungry cash shop.... and knowing Planetside is a pvp game- I can't see how they're going to make money without making the game unfair. How are they going to have a lucrative enough cash shop without turning the game into a 'pay to win' model? Are players really going to be that interested in 'cosmetic' items in Planetside? We played the old planetside with pretty abhorrent graphics and didn't mind... why is someone going to pay for paint for their Mosquito?
If Smedley is known for anything, he's known for his ridiculously awful business decisions. I am hoping this crap he's spewing is just more of the same. If he wasn't making money on F2P, he probably wouldn't be making money at all. He can't compete, SOE can't compete. What else is he going to say?
No bitchers.
I think there will be more MMO's released using the B2P model, with cash shop. This gets over the hurdle of recouping costs, as you get the inital influx of cash from box sales. If the game is successful then this alone shuold cover the development costs then the cash shop and future box sales are all profit
Another alternative is games starting off as F2P and then moving to a subscription model. I know this seems backwards to many, including me, but as it says in the OP:
So. Release a game as F2P with a cash shop. If it takes off then they can develop it further and faster then offer a freemium type subscription, then use the funds raised to develop and expand the game further to a stage where you can start charging a full subscription
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
I lol'd
No bitchers.
Hahaha, its funny because its true
Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom
Yes, because after Gone with the Wind was made, not a single big-budget movie was ever made again.
Oh.... wait....
I think it's a good question. How profitable is the typical big budget MMO? I'm not sure, but I think an increasing amount of studio's are wary of invensting the mega-dollars to try to duplicate WoW's colossal success. It's like an infomercial for a home-gym...you see these ripped and buff dudes and go, "Yeah, I wanna be buff too!" and you discover that all it's good for is hanging laundry. Apparently MMO's don't print their own money.
That's the thing, we all know this to be true, but they STILL to this day spend tons and tons and tons of money on big blockbuster movies even though only a couple of them ever actually are good and win awards.
They MUST still make money.
But movies don't have to retain subscribers and keep servers running, they just pump out sequels.
The ones that "make it" have no problem and the ones who don't either go F2P or shut down.
It's "facts of life" kind of stuff, not really a debate here.
Well, to be brief, i do believe P2P model is pretty much dead, if for no other reason than that the bandwidth/server costs that were used to justify it are now largely gone.
This leaves us with TWO (not one, Smedley) models that are about to slug it out in the online arena.
One is the much touted F2P model and the other is B2P throwback to the olden times.
I don't know about you guys, but I do prefer the classical model. I find F2P creepy and at the moment I'm expected to pay money for something that is advertised as "free" I get this creepy feeling (like when you meet that nice guy in a night club who offers you "something" for free) and I bug out. On the other hand, I'll happily play a demo (or a screwed up single-player pirate version) and then proudly cough up 50+ bucks for the full game if I find it worth it (and I do, more often than not).
So... IMO P2P is gone. I'll do B2P and even pay up for funny hats in F2P occasionally (but ONLY funny hats. No guns) But my bet is on B2P. I find full F2P just too creepy and ultimately no fun at all.