Without all of the features of a full subscription based MMO, the game is not worth playing in my opinion. In other words, if the MMO lacks a tab-targeting system, no /follow command, no macros, it's not worth playing.
Mouse targeting is SLOW and OUTDATED and using a cross-hair is for first person shooter games, not for MMOs. Sorry, just my opinion.
Well, I can't say I agree with anything you said here. I am trying to get away from the same garbage that is done over and over again. The features you listed I could hardly care about. Tab-targeting? Ewww ... I am so over that. Using a cross-hair is NOT only for FPS games, I mean are you joking? When did features become genre locked?
My stance is, if it works ... it works. Aiming a spell at a target ... sorry to say, it makes sense. Aiming an arrow .... well that makes sense too. The only way you couldn't like that is if you want everything to be done for you. All auto combat.
Nothing wrong with that, but hey, what ever floats your boat. I like to have fun and be immersed into the games I play. What you listed works against that.
Also, slow and outdated? That is a laugh. Tab-targeting is just as outdated and probably slower XD.
Either A. play ESO for a monthly fee, a DAOC clone with no world pvp and lackluster pve with no sandbox elements at all.
Or B play GW2, a DAOC clone with no world pvp , lackluster pve and no sandbox elements for the cost of the box.
I won't bet on people paying a fee for a fre minor differences like nuances in the targeting system, a little more or a little less action combat oriented or simply on fluff alone. When the game in general is a big heaping dose of been there done that.
Man i'm so with you on this. Its like the same game over and over. And now its just boring. And the hype around these new game's confuse the heck out of me. I read about them and can't see what the big deal is with them. It has to be the generation of mmo player's that started out with Wow. Games like EQN, ESO and Wildstar. I read about them and its all been done before with maybe a little twist is all. And the funny part is after those games have been out 6 months and the next game comes rinse and repeat hype.
I know, eh? It's like sex... you might change things around a bit - like who's on top - but it's all the same thing. How boring!
You are kidding right? You can't even compare the two for so many reasons i'm sure a smart person like you should know.
Unless you really don't know, but I rather not have to go into a whole scientific rant on why you are wrong to compare the two. Short version though ... sex works in a completely different manner then something like a video game that one enjoys. A pretty big factor is the chemicals your brain sends out through your body during sex.
Good try though .... I suppose. Next time you try to compare something, try using similar things, tends to work a whole lot better.
Sort of like smoking cigs, when your addicted, you never get bored of it due to the chemicals your body craves. You can't compare it to video games, like your sex comparison, because one you can get bored of, and the other you can't due to biological and physical reasons.
Hmm... I wonder how many others didn't get the point of my sarcastic absurd statement?
Sex... we don't knock it just because it can be described as always more or less the same.
MMOs... typical "anti" posts in these forums knock MMOs for being more or less the same.
"More or less the same" is just a matter of perspective: you can choose to emphasize the similarities or the differences.
It's one of those "glass half full / half empty" things.... and no, playing MMOs is not like filling glasses.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
That isn't to dismiss what value $15 holds for you right now, you have a budget which such a sub would have a impact on, its merely to illustrate how the value of what we see our $$s having isn't what it seems, and erodes directly in proportion to what the clowns in D.C. drunkenly bumble their way through. As the negative economic impact of Obamacare kicks people in the 'nads, $15 for unlimited monthly entertainment will seem like a heck of a bargain.
I agree with you in everything besides $15 for unlimited entertainment.
It's not unlimited for one. It's only entertaining as long as it keeps you entertained. Not only that, but $15 a month varys for everyone. What do I mean by that? Well, one person will be spending a different amount per hour, since not everyone plays the same amount but does pay the same amount. Why should someone who plays 20 hours a month pay the same amount as someone who plays 200 hours? They certainly are not getting the same entertainment value out of it.
Perhaps i should've said "potentially unlimited"? What I wanted to imply was the sub covers you whether you play 2 hrs a day, or 20. Whether or not someone chooses to burn up that much of their finite lifespan doing this is a personal choice. I've gone through periods where I couldn't stomach doing more than 30 mins of gaming due to other urges/needs and times where I had marathon weekends where 3 hrs sleep a night was the rule. The only way this would be addressed in a manner that credits your thought properly is to charge a hourly rate, and that's something I would personally shy away from regardless of my gaming habits at any given time. Just a personal preference
This is the big problem I have with P2P. It assumes way to many factors. It assumes, you will like that game. If you don't ... haha .. tough .. money wasted. It assumes you will play the game a lot, if not, again haha ... money wasted. It assumes nothing will get in your way to play the game. Life events could stop you from playing for weeks .. heck maybe even a few. You payed for those weeks, so haha .. money wasted.
This was my logic behind buying more than a 6 month sub or god forbid, a lifetime sub (which I felt was the ultimate durrr buy choice a consumer can make). I think I see your point, being that if you paid for the month's use but barely have time to use it, were you really getting your value? Honestly? No you weren't, you're spot on saying that it assumes you're going to log in a given amount of time regularly. However I have yet to see a MMO with a P2P model that doesn't include a 30 day temp sub with the buy of the game. This doesn't make it a superior buy mind you, but before you commit to a sub to the best of my knowledge, no game released thus far doesn't give you a 30 day trial sub. Also its fairly common for a MMO to have a trial period without having to buy the game at all, which even though they have a sub, trumps the B2P model since there is no initial investment on a strictly try it out first basis, after a while the favor would revert to B2P if you stick with a game long enough. I've also bought B2P games that I played all of 5 hrs and then deleted from my drives, i didn't get much value there compared to someone who bought it and played it for 100 hrs, the potential to not like a game is the same in either case wouldn't you agree?
Fact of the matter is, B2P isn't appealing because it's "cheaper", It is appealing to me because it's more flexible and customer friendly.
As i stated before, you make your point well enough to where I agree with you in principle, and I understand the reasons you've stated as to why you feel a P2P model does not serve your best interests. I'm not trying to convert or convince you to depart from your value conclusions. My point is two fold:
The MMO industry is very cost conscious, meaning that all parties involved aimed their bean counters at this with the commandment being "Find the sweet spot". They determined this was P2P. Regardless of your or my or anyone else's opinions, this is what their analysis gave them as a path to take. Rest assured, if this turns out poorly for them, they will change the payment model to something else that delivers.
I don't mind paying $15 a month for a game i will enjoy spending time in. I don't think my spending $15 is superior to your philosophy for as I stated above, IMHO you made a good case for it. But the spend will not determine if I play the game, the game itself will determine whether I invest a spend in any form, and as of now, be it B2P or P2P I'll give it a shot.
Edit: Oh .. and the last issue I have with P2P ... is the fact I PAY for the game up front, and can't play the game if I don't pay the monthly fee. So I ask . .where does the upfront cost go to? It certainly doesn't go to me. I am a firm believer if a game is P2P, it shouldn't have a box price unless you are able to play single player.
Typically upfront sales with P2P models go to break even and make a 20-33% profit return on the first 90 days. Those are guesstimates mind you, subject to CEO Suits whimsies as to what is "good" or "acceptible". It factors in development and distribution costs, marketing, etc. B2P models are very different, profit margins have to be higher and the matter of inventory is also a hurdle though in recent years direct download has largely tamed distribution costs to be much more on demand responsive than previously with hard copy, a feature that used to be PC centric but has since moved to the console markets aggressively and with fantastic returns for IP owners. Hard copy releases also factored in profit losses due to piracy leading to price points covering it as well.
What you should be far more offended by is a B2P model that charges you 49.99 for a digital copy download, and 59.99 for a boxed disc with paper/plastic material that had to physically ship from production to store to home. That IMHO is a clear case of being bled, and if the title sells well past the 90 day period, the price reduction in digital download buys is typically 5-20%. Only after a couple of years do such purchase points drop to the 50% range and yet, its pure digital, the overhead is next to nothing.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Either A. play ESO for a monthly fee, a DAOC clone with no world pvp and lackluster pve with no sandbox elements at all.
Or B play GW2, a DAOC clone with no world pvp , lackluster pve and no sandbox elements for the cost of the box.
I won't bet on people paying a fee for a fre minor differences like nuances in the targeting system, a little more or a little less action combat oriented or simply on fluff alone. When the game in general is a big heaping dose of been there done that.
Man i'm so with you on this. Its like the same game over and over. And now its just boring. And the hype around these new game's confuse the heck out of me. I read about them and can't see what the big deal is with them. It has to be the generation of mmo player's that started out with Wow. Games like EQN, ESO and Wildstar. I read about them and its all been done before with maybe a little twist is all. And the funny part is after those games have been out 6 months and the next game comes rinse and repeat hype.
Hariken and Sleepyfish both hit the nail on the head like Batman clocking Superman (we all know who would win that fight, the Bat, hands down).
While I'm intrigued by ESO and will give it a try, I am doing mostly so because of DAoC nostalgia while chasing the ES IP and a few other things. I don't expect to feel like it'll be totally new experience, I'm too much of a jaded old gamer to chew on that pipe anymore. This site alone shows how mired in retreading the industry is, I occassionally hit the game forums listing and go at all the craptastic games doing the same old thing in different skins. Seriously, I'm appalled at just how long that list of forums is, at least 90% are cheap ME TOO drivel.
WARNING rant incoming:
MMOs are in a rut, a coffin deep rut perpetuated by the twin forces of conditioned common entertainment models and common tech index slaved to projected profit margins. By "projected" what i mean is CEOs assuming something will make money based upon historical sales of other products of which they usually know zip about past $$$ signs. Which means those damn consoles are going to determine way more the future of MMOs than anything else. yes i console hate, sue me for being unapologetically elitist and politically incorrect that way. When a MMO publisher is catering to consoles, he had to make design concessions, this fact will persist and put a glass ceiling on games until the tech of a console is fully on par with what a PC can do.
Sadly, Sandbox games really are where the future should be headed, actually it should be here now way more than it is, but all too often, themepark invades sandbox as the conditioned habits of console style play manifest over and over again. Skyrim on the console is a joke IMO, as was Oblivion. I remember the literally dropped jaw my nephews had when they came over to my man-cave and watched me play both games on the PC with a robust mod library. I had to do a lot of homework to get my mods to work, and the mod community deserves all the credit for making them and have them play nice with each other. And it wasn't just gfx, it was content. My eldest nephew was in awe of some of the dungeons and play styles that were available through mods, everything from playing a wushu style monk to the magic mods that completely changed how magic was handled in the game. A PC-Modded Skyrim/Oblivion blows the doors off the console versions with no argument possible to the contrary.
Consoles are insert disk, and play. Mimimal fuss, "fair" content for the masses leading to profits for publishers. Thats why there are boss fights in every MMO, scripted in exactly the style of console games. Many like to Blizz-hate with WoW being the evil force dumbing down MMOs, but what Blizz did was react to market forces by taking tapping the console player base and giving them a console style MMO with each expansion further "console-fying" WoW to its present state. Ever see a bright yellow ! over the head of a npc in EQ? One had to explore the world, interact with it, and yes the ultimate evil...read. In modern MMOs the big push is voice and the kids rant at how much better that is. Yet when i quiz them as to what the voice said, their memory retention of what was said is little better than clicking on the big yellow !, clicking accept, and following map waypoints. How much different would a MMO be if there were no icon marked quest givers or map way points for you to know where to go? What if you had to explore your map and lets say you could make in game notes on your map, but no waypoint markers other than what you put down? Would a game like that survive the hordes of console players and their expectations? Perhaps I'm a cynic but I don't think it would.
What MMOs need to do in order to evolve, in a nutshell, is be more like a PC-Skyrim modded game that lets you sandbox according to taste and less the console Skyrim eat-your-chicken-McNugget-and-STFU games. And until consumers stop biting, publishers won't stop making them. And yes, I'm totally guilty of biting with ESO as it is right now, what can I say? I want a nostalgic MMO fix which I will probably hang up in 3-6 months
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
That isn't to dismiss what value $15 holds for you right now, you have a budget which such a sub would have a impact on, its merely to illustrate how the value of what we see our $$s having isn't what it seems, and erodes directly in proportion to what the clowns in D.C. drunkenly bumble their way through. As the negative economic impact of Obamacare kicks people in the 'nads, $15 for unlimited monthly entertainment will seem like a heck of a bargain.
I agree with you in everything besides $15 for unlimited entertainment.
It's not unlimited for one. It's only entertaining as long as it keeps you entertained. Not only that, but $15 a month varys for everyone. What do I mean by that? Well, one person will be spending a different amount per hour, since not everyone plays the same amount but does pay the same amount. Why should someone who plays 20 hours a month pay the same amount as someone who plays 200 hours? They certainly are not getting the same entertainment value out of it.
Perhaps i should've said "potentially unlimited"? What I wanted to imply was the sub covers you whether you play 2 hrs a day, or 20. Whether or not someone chooses to burn up that much of their finite lifespan doing this is a personal choice. I've gone through periods where I couldn't stomach doing more than 30 mins of gaming due to other urges/needs and times where I had marathon weekends where 3 hrs sleep a night was the rule. The only way this would be addressed in a manner that credits your thought properly is to charge a hourly rate, and that's something I would personally shy away from regardless of my gaming habits at any given time. Just a personal preference
This is the big problem I have with P2P. It assumes way to many factors. It assumes, you will like that game. If you don't ... haha .. tough .. money wasted. It assumes you will play the game a lot, if not, again haha ... money wasted. It assumes nothing will get in your way to play the game. Life events could stop you from playing for weeks .. heck maybe even a few. You payed for those weeks, so haha .. money wasted.
This was my logic behind buying more than a 6 month sub or god forbid, a lifetime sub (which I felt was the ultimate durrr buy choice a consumer can make). I think I see your point, being that if you paid for the month's use but barely have time to use it, were you really getting your value? Honestly? No you weren't, you're spot on saying that it assumes you're going to log in a given amount of time regularly. However I have yet to see a MMO with a P2P model that doesn't include a 30 day temp sub with the buy of the game. This doesn't make it a superior buy mind you, but before you commit to a sub to the best of my knowledge, no game released thus far doesn't give you a 30 day trial sub. Also its fairly common for a MMO to have a trial period without having to buy the game at all, which even though they have a sub, trumps the B2P model since there is no initial investment on a strictly try it out first basis, after a while the favor would revert to B2P if you stick with a game long enough. I've also bought B2P games that I played all of 5 hrs and then deleted from my drives, i didn't get much value there compared to someone who bought it and played it for 100 hrs, the potential to not like a game is the same in either case wouldn't you agree?
Fact of the matter is, B2P isn't appealing because it's "cheaper", It is appealing to me because it's more flexible and customer friendly.
As i stated before, you make your point well enough to where I agree with you in principle, and I understand the reasons you've stated as to why you feel a P2P model does not serve your best interests. I'm not trying to convert or convince you to depart from your value conclusions. My point is two fold:
The MMO industry is very cost conscious, meaning that all parties involved aimed their bean counters at this with the commandment being "Find the sweet spot". They determined this was P2P. Regardless of your or my or anyone else's opinions, this is what their analysis gave them as a path to take. Rest assured, if this turns out poorly for them, they will change the payment model to something else that delivers.
I don't mind paying $15 a month for a game i will enjoy spending time in. I don't think my spending $15 is superior to your philosophy for as I stated above, IMHO you made a good case for it. But the spend will not determine if I play the game, the game itself will determine whether I invest a spend in any form, and as of now, be it B2P or P2P I'll give it a shot.
Edit: Oh .. and the last issue I have with P2P ... is the fact I PAY for the game up front, and can't play the game if I don't pay the monthly fee. So I ask . .where does the upfront cost go to? It certainly doesn't go to me. I am a firm believer if a game is P2P, it shouldn't have a box price unless you are able to play single player.
Typically upfront sales with P2P models go to break even and make a 20-33% profit return on the first 90 days. Those are guesstimates mind you, subject to CEO Suits whimsies as to what is "good" or "acceptible". It factors in development and distribution costs, marketing, etc. B2P models are very different, profit margins have to be higher and the matter of inventory is also a hurdle though in recent years direct download has largely tamed distribution costs to be much more on demand responsive than previously with hard copy, a feature that used to be PC centric but has since moved to the console markets aggressively and with fantastic returns for IP owners. Hard copy releases also factored in profit losses due to piracy leading to price points covering it as well.
What you should be far more offended by is a B2P model that charges you 49.99 for a digital copy download, and 59.99 for a boxed disc with paper/plastic material that had to physically ship from production to store to home. That IMHO is a clear case of being bled, and if the title sells well past the 90 day period, the price reduction in digital download buys is typically 5-20%. Only after a couple of years do such purchase points drop to the 50% range and yet, its pure digital, the overhead is next to nothing.
Well I am not going to comment on every single part of this post, since I really do not have much to say, and for the most part agree with you.
However,
"I've also bought B2P games that I played all of 5 hrs and then deleted from my drives, i didn't get much value there compared to someone who bought it and played it for 100 hrs, the potential to not like a game is the same in either case wouldn't you agree?"
Right, you make a valid point. However, the big difference is ... that B2P games, you are able to pick up again at any point in time with out having to pay a dime. The amount of time you play is on you. A P2P game, you pay the $15 a month for that time. Meaning if you do not play it, you didn't get what you payed for. Also, Once you stop paying, you can't pick it back up until you pay again. The amount of time you play directly effects the cost of a P2P, while it does not for a B2P.
Either A. play ESO for a monthly fee, a DAOC clone with no world pvp and lackluster pve with no sandbox elements at all.
Or B play GW2, a DAOC clone with no world pvp , lackluster pve and no sandbox elements for the cost of the box.
I won't bet on people paying a fee for a fre minor differences like nuances in the targeting system, a little more or a little less action combat oriented or simply on fluff alone. When the game in general is a big heaping dose of been there done that.
Man i'm so with you on this. Its like the same game over and over. And now its just boring. And the hype around these new game's confuse the heck out of me. I read about them and can't see what the big deal is with them. It has to be the generation of mmo player's that started out with Wow. Games like EQN, ESO and Wildstar. I read about them and its all been done before with maybe a little twist is all. And the funny part is after those games have been out 6 months and the next game comes rinse and repeat hype.
Hariken and Sleepyfish both hit the nail on the head like Batman clocking Superman (we all know who would win that fight, the Bat, hands down).
While I'm intrigued by ESO and will give it a try, I am doing mostly so because of DAoC nostalgia while chasing the ES IP and a few other things. I don't expect to feel like it'll be totally new experience, I'm too much of a jaded old gamer to chew on that pipe anymore. This site alone shows how mired in retreading the industry is, I occassionally hit the game forums listing and go at all the craptastic games doing the same old thing in different skins. Seriously, I'm appalled at just how long that list of forums is, at least 90% are cheap ME TOO drivel.
WARNING rant incoming:
MMOs are in a rut, a coffin deep rut perpetuated by the twin forces of conditioned common entertainment models and common tech index slaved to projected profit margins. By "projected" what i mean is CEOs assuming something will make money based upon historical sales of other products of which they usually know zip about past $$$ signs. Which means those damn consoles are going to determine way more the future of MMOs than anything else. yes i console hate, sue me for being unapologetically elitist and politically incorrect that way. When a MMO publisher is catering to consoles, he had to make design concessions, this fact will persist and put a glass ceiling on games until the tech of a console is fully on par with what a PC can do.
Sadly, Sandbox games really are where the future should be headed, actually it should be here now way more than it is, but all too often, themepark invades sandbox as the conditioned habits of console style play manifest over and over again. Skyrim on the console is a joke IMO, as was Oblivion. I remember the literally dropped jaw my nephews had when they came over to my man-cave and watched me play both games on the PC with a robust mod library. I had to do a lot of homework to get my mods to work, and the mod community deserves all the credit for making them and have them play nice with each other. And it wasn't just gfx, it was content. My eldest nephew was in awe of some of the dungeons and play styles that were available through mods, everything from playing a wushu style monk to the magic mods that completely changed how magic was handled in the game. A PC-Modded Skyrim/Oblivion blows the doors off the console versions with no argument possible to the contrary.
Consoles are insert disk, and play. Mimimal fuss, "fair" content for the masses leading to profits for publishers. Thats why there are boss fights in every MMO, scripted in exactly the style of console games. Many like to Blizz-hate with WoW being the evil force dumbing down MMOs, but what Blizz did was react to market forces by taking tapping the console player base and giving them a console style MMO with each expansion further "console-fying" WoW to its present state. Ever see a bright yellow ! over the head of a npc in EQ? One had to explore the world, interact with it, and yes the ultimate evil...read. In modern MMOs the big push is voice and the kids rant at how much better that is. Yet when i quiz them as to what the voice said, their memory retention of what was said is little better than clicking on the big yellow !, clicking accept, and following map waypoints. How much different would a MMO be if there were no icon marked quest givers or map way points for you to know where to go? What if you had to explore your map and lets say you could make in game notes on your map, but no waypoint markers other than what you put down? Would a game like that survive the hordes of console players and their expectations? Perhaps I'm a cynic but I don't think it would.
What MMOs need to do in order to evolve, in a nutshell, is be more like a PC-Skyrim modded game that lets you sandbox according to taste and less the console Skyrim eat-your-chicken-McNugget-and-STFU games. And until consumers stop biting, publishers won't stop making them. And yes, I'm totally guilty of biting with ESO as it is right now, what can I say? I want a nostalgic MMO fix which I will probably hang up in 3-6 months
Seeker728 you sir are awesome. You nailed down everything i feel about where mmo's are going and why its bad. And yes i agree that console's are taking over gaming. That's one of the reason's why new mmo's are so casual. Its that sit on the couch in front of the tv thing. And why pay to play any mmo that's a copy of something else that you played. Think about it of course its your money to do with whatever. Box prices of 60+ dollars for mmo's with subs is just wrong and as long as gamer's buy them it won't ever change. I'M lucky though,i got my favorite mmo back and its totally f2p without a cash shop. Neocron 2 may be an older game but it's community run now. Something a U.S. game company would never let happen. They would just take it down and throw it in a vault. So am glad i get to play my favorite mmo again. Old school graphics and complex skill system a game that makes you use your head and its triple xp weekend now.
While I do understand the genre is moving towards F2P, I've always prefered the P2P model, I'm glad it's P2P. In my experience, people that pay a sub for a game are a bit more invested. I know in games that are F2P and have a sub, one of the first questions is always, "are you a sub or a freebie?" It lets you know how is just hanging out, not that serious, and who is actually there to stay for a bit.
I state that based on my experience with the three difference payment models
Agree with Eleenb4, and I believe that those who pay a subscription are:
"more invested"
"more mature"
and frankly a better class of committed player.
I for one am ecstatic that games are going back to subscription based play.
Nice to see someone sharing my sentiment. I know there are some that will disagree, but this again, this is a personal opinion based on my MMO experiences since EQ1.
Honestly with my experiences in Elder scrolls I would pay anything to play their product. I know it's sad, but I freakin love their games. The only thing I'm going to miss unless they add it later is the random killing NPCs and getting a bounty.
What many people neglect to consider is the fact that even if the game is P2P with a sub, doesn't mean it won't have a cash shop as well.
That is why I'd prefer the game to be B2P like GW2, as most likely even with a subscription the lure of adding a cash shop to milk players further is too tempting.
If it was JUST buy and pay the subscription with no cash shop, that would be fine with me, but I doubt it will go that way as MMO publishers these days all want a piece of the Cash Shop pie, even if they're already charging a sub.
Played: DAoC, AC2, WoW, CoH, GW, GW2, WAR, AoC, Champions Online, Rift, Dragon Nest, Vindictus, Warframe, Neverwinter, Dungeon Fighter Online
"I've also bought B2P games that I played all of 5 hrs and then deleted from my drives, i didn't get much value there compared to someone who bought it and played it for 100 hrs, the potential to not like a game is the same in either case wouldn't you agree?"
Right, you make a valid point. However, the big difference is ... that B2P games, you are able to pick up again at any point in time with out having to pay a dime. The amount of time you play is on you. A P2P game, you pay the $15 a month for that time. Meaning if you do not play it, you didn't get what you payed for. Also, Once you stop paying, you can't pick it back up until you pay again. The amount of time you play directly effects the cost of a P2P, while it does not for a B2P.
Indeed Brabbit1987, you are correct. In fact I was thinking of our conversation in this thread just last night when in a fit of curiosity, I reinstalled GW2 on my drive. I own the game and am able to jump back in (clumsily) to the game with no sub and thought how the B2P model does have the consumer friendly advantage of letting me get right back into the action with no immediate further spend (I qualify it with "immediate" since future spends may still be forthcoming and can't rule them out).
I then compared that feeling to when back in January, a old friend of mine managed to wear down my resistance to fire up WoW again with a free 7 day trial he had emailed me and since i hadn't uninstalled the game yet, I honored our friendship and activated the trail. I harbor no ill feelings for those who enjoy the game still mind you, but after about 45 minutes, I exited the game and proceeded to uninstall the game because I knew there is no desire on my part to sub to what WoW had become.
I debated with myself as I wandered around in Lion's Arch last night if I would've been as quick to uninstall WoW were it a B2P model like GW2. I decided that in this particular instance, the P2P model did me a unexpected service, for while I don't hate Blizzard (I just can't stand what WoW has become), the payment model put a firm "NO!" sign infront of me. Were it B2P, I'd leave it on my drive and occasionally dink around in the game before I gagged and left it alone again (I'm odd that way). It doesn't IMO provide a case for either model's virtues, I just thought it was a interesting inner gauge of value where it did me a service, even if it isn't as consumer friendly as B2P is.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
You nailed down everything i feel about where mmo's are going and why its bad. And yes i agree that console's are taking over gaming. That's one of the reason's why new mmo's are so casual. Its that sit on the couch in front of the tv thing. And why pay to play any mmo that's a copy of something else that you played. Think about it of course its your money to do with whatever. Box prices of 60+ dollars for mmo's with subs is just wrong and as long as gamer's buy them it won't ever change. I'M lucky though,i got my favorite mmo back and its totally f2p without a cash shop. Neocron 2 may be an older game but it's community run now. Something a U.S. game company would never let happen. They would just take it down and throw it in a vault. So am glad i get to play my favorite mmo again. Old school graphics and complex skill system a game that makes you use your head and its triple xp weekend now.
I thank you for your praise Hariken, I promise I won't let it go to my head
I live in Las Vegas and have the luxury of attending all kinds of conferences and knowing people who know people, with a little bit of effort I can find my way into them even if they're not here in town. I've met with game developers and studio officers and privately more than a few have confided that there is plenty of resentment in the industry among dev teams how the pursuit of profit is 1st, 2nd, and 3rd among priorities and that the Suits put gameplay, community and many other features as distant priorities. As an example, one young man I spoke with mentioned how a executive of "a friendly rival" said Bethesda execs were idiots for not charging a license fee for the tool kit and further fees for each mod download made with the kit. This same young man said "He also said 'Gamers are idiots, you can cash shop the fuck out of them so long as the costs are small."
(Mind you, I'm sure there are legal hoops that would have to be jumped, but a corp could set up a eula to serve their agenda to pull this off were it a hurdle previously)
And there were several other individuals present at that dinner who confirmed the quote. Due to possible legal reasons, I hope you'll understand why i don't put out names. That sort of disdain however doesn't surprise me from a high ranking executive, its really no different than the disdain that politicians feel for their constituents and the fleecing of the citizenry they do regularly. The bottom line being, MMO vets are jaded and bored to tears for a very good reason, and things like what the Neocron community is doing worth emulating in other titles. My feelings towards ES products (Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim to be exact) wouldn't be the warm fuzzy glow if not for the mod community who pours so much love and devotion into the titles, especially with zero compensation for their efforts.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
This spot on. Don't blame the f2p gamer's fun ruining your mmo's. Blame it on greedy suits at game companies. That article say's what i've been saying for awhile now. And also prove's that f2p gamer's bring in more money than sub only player's.
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
This spot on. Don't blame the f2p gamer's fun ruining your mmo's. Blame it on greedy suits at game companies. That article say's what i've been saying for awhile now. And also prove's that f2p gamer's bring in more money than sub only player's.
From what I have seen in the various F2P games I've tried, what I hold the playerbase I've encountered accountable for is their behavior, and in general its more toxic than what I've encountered in P2P/B2P models. Then I blame the Suits for allowing such behavior to persist because their answer to all problems is to put a person on /ignore. The only way to curb negative childish behavior is with a spanking, and often companies don't want to spend the money to erect a system to mete out a fair punitive system. Mores the pity really.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
i love when people say these things. Implying that the reason behind not willing to pay for a monthly subscription is being unemployed. And then generalising with the "too many of you" type of finger pointing.
Um, does the phrase "Barrens chat" mean anything to you? You know, the monicker for the worst, most immature chat ever -- and it came from a P2P game, not an F2P game.
I hit more immature, elitist snobbery and childishness in WoW than anywhere else -- and again, that's the model of the sub-game.
More mature? I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at that one.
I read most of this thread and see a reoccurring thing I needed to say something about.
It seems a LOT of people who are against this being p2p are GW2 fans. Always stating that B2P is the way to go.
I played that game. It was a f2p cash shop game with a box price. You cant sit there with a straight face and tell me a game that has me use the cash shop to expand my tiny inventory isn't a damn f2p game...only they suckered me by telling me their game was b2p. Buy to play is like a single player game where you buy the box and that's it. Slapping a box price on an item mall game is just some new sort of evil that needs to start and end with GW2.
Also, I see a few people posting here that they will never play a p2p again, but are in the ffxiv forums posting about how they got to level 50 already...strange
Well anyway, stop trying to use gw2 as an argument for buy to play. its not buy to play its a cash shop game with a box price, and ill never fall for that one again.
Im sticking with p2p for now. They really need to remarket it as "never pay more than $15 a month" because a lot of these f2p games get you to pay far more than that a month...or make the game really frustrating, slow, and well...not fun....I don't have time to waste on games that are not fun because I didn't pay enough...I got enough unfun things to do in my life and they don't require a $60 cash shop purchase to temporality remedy that situation
I think the real advantage to p2p is that they can hire a staff based on monthly sales and be more stable with development. That and I know up front how much ill be paying out of pocket to play. Never any surprises.
Lastly, a lot of the arguments against p2p use games that go f2p after launch as an excuse. I can only think of a couple games that actually went f2p. Games like AOC, WAR, Anarchy Online, SWTOR...shit I know im missing a lot here but off the top of my head those games all restrict content from free players, and offer a p2p option to unlock it all...I don't call that f2p I call that a really long trial. The list of games that actually went from p2p to f2p are like, aion,L2, TERA....and I think that's it. Those are the only games I can think of that were p2p and then went f2p not restricting any of the games content. The rest were a dirty trap to milk a dying player base and get some new suckers in.
Bah, most of this is filled with false information and a very biased opinion.
I will never play a P2P games because it's too expensive. Sure, it doesn't sound like much, but it adds up. I don't think 1 game is worth that much. It's really simple to say, I don't like the model. P2P is a placebo to some as it makes some people feel they are getting a "quality" game and getting "quality updates." The truth of the matter is, I said placebo, because that is what it is. There really is no proof behind those claims, and in most cases, they are not true at all. Another good one, is that it keeps out the trolls and such. I never understood how that even makes sense. Trolls are not limited to just the people who will not pay >.>. Again, it is a very laughable and questionable statement.
As for F2P getting you to pay more then $15 a month? LOL only if your stupid. No one makes a person pay for stupid item mall items.
As for your whole GW2 complaint. B2P doesn't require a item mall just so you know, nor does it require one like GW2. Also, even if expanding an inventory is a coupe bucks, it's still cheaper then $15 a month xD. So I am not even sure why the heck you would complain about it, and yet be comfortable with paying more for nothing. Is $15 a month on invisible content better to you? Do you expect to get a full games worth of content every 4 months? Heck, I do, which is why I say it's not worth it.
Then your advantage for being P2P statement is also pretty funny. P2P games, don't do very well anymore. It's been on a decline for a long time now. Like the past 5 years. Sure, they have great staff in the beginning, then it slowly degrades and declines until the game goes F2P.
Last but not least, many games went F2P. You calling it a long free trial doesn't change the fact that it's a F2P game. You also have to pay attention to the numbers of each of these games. Each P2P game that has come out year after year has gotten worse and worse. Most of them are not getting enough subs to keep it a P2P game.
See the issue is, I know a lot of people like the P2P model. It's a decent model if used correctly. However, what you like and I like personally, does not matter. What matters is money and numbers.
If it wasn't for the stupid people according to you, you wouldn't have a game to play.
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
This spot on. Don't blame the f2p gamer's fun ruining your mmo's. Blame it on greedy suits at game companies. That article say's what i've been saying for awhile now. And also prove's that f2p gamer's bring in more money than sub only player's.
From what I have seen in the various F2P games I've tried, what I hold the playerbase I've encountered accountable for is their behavior, and in general its more toxic than what I've encountered in P2P/B2P models. Then I blame the Suits for allowing such behavior to persist because their answer to all problems is to put a person on /ignore. The only way to curb negative childish behavior is with a spanking, and often companies don't want to spend the money to erect a system to mete out a fair punitive system. Mores the pity really.
You make a good point but how people act is on that person. I can tell you this, I started out playing mmo's back in 2000. People in those early games were good but as the genre became mainstream it got worse in just about every game i've played whether its p2p or f2p. And today there's an equal amount of bad in both types of game's. Its un fair to say that all the bad people are the f2p gamer's. I've met a lot of jerks in p2p game's too. So how do you know that jerk you just met is a f2p player un less the whole game is f2p. The worse people i've ever met in a mmo were p2p Wow players.
Just interested to see who is still going to play with this payment method.
*Edit* I guess I could have made this poll better with maybe or with more info. Say yes for maybe then, because I'm just seeing how many just got turned off by the idea of subscription based and know they aren't playing because of it.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
I'm not sure I like the article.
In one paragraph he says that f2p essentially helped turn studios around that were hemorrhaging money and that certain games wouldn't exist without it and in another paragraph he indicates that f2p was created by nickel and diming suits. and is a better way to bilk customers out of their money.
Soooo, if a game uses the f2p model they are only thinking of themselves and ways to lift every penny from the player and if they don't use it they might not exist.
And of course studios invented it. Players didn't invent the subscriptoin either it was studios. Essentially companies need to do what they can to survive.
This sound to me like someone who wants to have their cake and eat it too.
Of course companies exist to make money. Do you work at your job "not to make money". If your employer came to you and said "we have to cut your salary 20% but because of this we will be able to give our customers better products would you not reconsider?
The problem here is that both sides seem to be at odds. Companies want to exist, want to pay their employees and good companies want to take care of good employees. Gamers want to pay the least they possibly can pay with the exception of those who want to pay to get out on top. It's like they think it's a club where companies should just get by so that players can have all the games they want for minimal cost. Which make sense we all want to pay the least we can pay and get the most from that buck. But in the end "of course" customers are dollar signs. It's not a club. We aren't all friends. They want money. And "we" as investors want our investments to make money. Are any people here saying that all your investments don't make money? And do you actually keep your money in those investments?
If someone invests in a company that company needs to deliver. If they have a problem with this then don't take investor's money and take your chances.
I'm not for f2p for a variety of reasons but it sounds to me like there is a wide polarization going on here.
There are players who will not pay a dime and they are proud of it. And they think this is a good thing because "they are the content so they are exempt".
I question how valid that is.
Now that I think of it I'll say that "some players helped create f2p". How? Developers saw that rmt was huge and that that plaeyrs were clearly willing to pay money outside of the game in order to get benefits. Developers were spending money to fight rmt traders, power levellers, essentially any third party that was willing to offer perks and services to players. So instead developers decided to head these third parties off at the pass and give players what they wanted. Allow them to spend money on things that they desired.
It's a viscous circle.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I read most of this thread and see a reoccurring thing I needed to say something about.
It seems a LOT of people who are against this being p2p are GW2 fans. Always stating that B2P is the way to go.
I played that game. It was a f2p cash shop game with a box price. You cant sit there with a straight face and tell me a game that has me use the cash shop to expand my tiny inventory isn't a damn f2p game...only they suckered me by telling me their game was b2p. Buy to play is like a single player game where you buy the box and that's it. Slapping a box price on an item mall game is just some new sort of evil that needs to start and end with GW2.
Also, I see a few people posting here that they will never play a p2p again, but are in the ffxiv forums posting about how they got to level 50 already...strange
Well anyway, stop trying to use gw2 as an argument for buy to play. its not buy to play its a cash shop game with a box price, and ill never fall for that one again.
Im sticking with p2p for now. They really need to remarket it as "never pay more than $15 a month" because a lot of these f2p games get you to pay far more than that a month...or make the game really frustrating, slow, and well...not fun....I don't have time to waste on games that are not fun because I didn't pay enough...I got enough unfun things to do in my life and they don't require a $60 cash shop purchase to temporality remedy that situation
I think the real advantage to p2p is that they can hire a staff based on monthly sales and be more stable with development. That and I know up front how much ill be paying out of pocket to play. Never any surprises.
Lastly, a lot of the arguments against p2p use games that go f2p after launch as an excuse. I can only think of a couple games that actually went f2p. Games like AOC, WAR, Anarchy Online, SWTOR...shit I know im missing a lot here but off the top of my head those games all restrict content from free players, and offer a p2p option to unlock it all...I don't call that f2p I call that a really long trial. The list of games that actually went from p2p to f2p are like, aion,L2, TERA....and I think that's it. Those are the only games I can think of that were p2p and then went f2p not restricting any of the games content. The rest were a dirty trap to milk a dying player base and get some new suckers in.
Bah, most of this is filled with false information and a very biased opinion.
I will never play a P2P games because it's too expensive. Sure, it doesn't sound like much, but it adds up. I don't think 1 game is worth that much. It's really simple to say, I don't like the model. P2P is a placebo to some as it makes some people feel they are getting a "quality" game and getting "quality updates." The truth of the matter is, I said placebo, because that is what it is. There really is no proof behind those claims, and in most cases, they are not true at all. Another good one, is that it keeps out the trolls and such. I never understood how that even makes sense. Trolls are not limited to just the people who will not pay >.>. Again, it is a very laughable and questionable statement.
As for F2P getting you to pay more then $15 a month? LOL only if your stupid. No one makes a person pay for stupid item mall items.
As for your whole GW2 complaint. B2P doesn't require a item mall just so you know, nor does it require one like GW2. Also, even if expanding an inventory is a coupe bucks, it's still cheaper then $15 a month xD. So I am not even sure why the heck you would complain about it, and yet be comfortable with paying more for nothing. Is $15 a month on invisible content better to you? Do you expect to get a full games worth of content every 4 months? Heck, I do, which is why I say it's not worth it.
Then your advantage for being P2P statement is also pretty funny. P2P games, don't do very well anymore. It's been on a decline for a long time now. Like the past 5 years. Sure, they have great staff in the beginning, then it slowly degrades and declines until the game goes F2P.
Last but not least, many games went F2P. You calling it a long free trial doesn't change the fact that it's a F2P game. You also have to pay attention to the numbers of each of these games. Each P2P game that has come out year after year has gotten worse and worse. Most of them are not getting enough subs to keep it a P2P game.
See the issue is, I know a lot of people like the P2P model. It's a decent model if used correctly. However, what you like and I like personally, does not matter. What matters is money and numbers.
If it wasn't for the stupid people according to you, you wouldn't have a game to play.
You missed the point entirely, good job.
My point was, that no one is MAKING you buy it. You can easily play a F2P game entirely free if you so choose. So it is only more then $15 a month if you choose to make it more. It's your choice. If you are to stupid to make a simple choice, that is your own fault.
I am not saying to not buy anything or if you do you are stupid. I am saying if you buy it just to buy it because it's there .. then you are stupid. I personally don't know anyone who does this. However, that is what is being implied if one says you pay more on a F2P game then a P2P. That isn't true at all. You can, but again, it's your own choice. It isn't forced on you at all. You simply pay what you want or what you feel is worth paying for.
I read most of this thread and see a reoccurring thing I needed to say something about.
It seems a LOT of people who are against this being p2p are GW2 fans. Always stating that B2P is the way to go.
I played that game. It was a f2p cash shop game with a box price. You cant sit there with a straight face and tell me a game that has me use the cash shop to expand my tiny inventory isn't a damn f2p game...only they suckered me by telling me their game was b2p. Buy to play is like a single player game where you buy the box and that's it. Slapping a box price on an item mall game is just some new sort of evil that needs to start and end with GW2.
Also, I see a few people posting here that they will never play a p2p again, but are in the ffxiv forums posting about how they got to level 50 already...strange
Well anyway, stop trying to use gw2 as an argument for buy to play. its not buy to play its a cash shop game with a box price, and ill never fall for that one again.
Im sticking with p2p for now. They really need to remarket it as "never pay more than $15 a month" because a lot of these f2p games get you to pay far more than that a month...or make the game really frustrating, slow, and well...not fun....I don't have time to waste on games that are not fun because I didn't pay enough...I got enough unfun things to do in my life and they don't require a $60 cash shop purchase to temporality remedy that situation
I think the real advantage to p2p is that they can hire a staff based on monthly sales and be more stable with development. That and I know up front how much ill be paying out of pocket to play. Never any surprises.
Lastly, a lot of the arguments against p2p use games that go f2p after launch as an excuse. I can only think of a couple games that actually went f2p. Games like AOC, WAR, Anarchy Online, SWTOR...shit I know im missing a lot here but off the top of my head those games all restrict content from free players, and offer a p2p option to unlock it all...I don't call that f2p I call that a really long trial. The list of games that actually went from p2p to f2p are like, aion,L2, TERA....and I think that's it. Those are the only games I can think of that were p2p and then went f2p not restricting any of the games content. The rest were a dirty trap to milk a dying player base and get some new suckers in.
Bah, most of this is filled with false information and a very biased opinion.
I will never play a P2P games because it's too expensive. Sure, it doesn't sound like much, but it adds up. I don't think 1 game is worth that much. It's really simple to say, I don't like the model. P2P is a placebo to some as it makes some people feel they are getting a "quality" game and getting "quality updates." The truth of the matter is, I said placebo, because that is what it is. There really is no proof behind those claims, and in most cases, they are not true at all. Another good one, is that it keeps out the trolls and such. I never understood how that even makes sense. Trolls are not limited to just the people who will not pay >.>. Again, it is a very laughable and questionable statement.
As for F2P getting you to pay more then $15 a month? LOL only if your stupid. No one makes a person pay for stupid item mall items.
As for your whole GW2 complaint. B2P doesn't require a item mall just so you know, nor does it require one like GW2. Also, even if expanding an inventory is a coupe bucks, it's still cheaper then $15 a month xD. So I am not even sure why the heck you would complain about it, and yet be comfortable with paying more for nothing. Is $15 a month on invisible content better to you? Do you expect to get a full games worth of content every 4 months? Heck, I do, which is why I say it's not worth it.
Then your advantage for being P2P statement is also pretty funny. P2P games, don't do very well anymore. It's been on a decline for a long time now. Like the past 5 years. Sure, they have great staff in the beginning, then it slowly degrades and declines until the game goes F2P.
Last but not least, many games went F2P. You calling it a long free trial doesn't change the fact that it's a F2P game. You also have to pay attention to the numbers of each of these games. Each P2P game that has come out year after year has gotten worse and worse. Most of them are not getting enough subs to keep it a P2P game.
See the issue is, I know a lot of people like the P2P model. It's a decent model if used correctly. However, what you like and I like personally, does not matter. What matters is money and numbers.
If it wasn't for the stupid people according to you, you wouldn't have a game to play.
You missed the point entirely, good job.
My point was, that no one is MAKING you buy it. You can easily play a F2P game entirely free if you so choose. So it is only more then $15 a month if you choose to make it more. It's your choice. If you are to stupid to make a simple choice, that is your own fault.
I am not saying to not buy anything or if you do you are stupid. I am saying if you buy it just to buy it because it's there .. then you are stupid. I personally don't know anyone who does this. However, that is what is being implied if one says you pay more on a F2P game then a P2P. That isn't true at all. You can, but again, it's your own choice. It isn't forced on you at all. You simply pay what you want or what you feel is worth paying for.
Either way you wont get people to play a game with a war of semantics.All games in existence is not the debate but this game is. Would I pay for some games, sure. Would I play a ftp game, sure. Would I pay for this game when a game almost just like it is out there for box price, no.
Comments
Well, I can't say I agree with anything you said here. I am trying to get away from the same garbage that is done over and over again. The features you listed I could hardly care about. Tab-targeting? Ewww ... I am so over that. Using a cross-hair is NOT only for FPS games, I mean are you joking? When did features become genre locked?
My stance is, if it works ... it works. Aiming a spell at a target ... sorry to say, it makes sense. Aiming an arrow .... well that makes sense too. The only way you couldn't like that is if you want everything to be done for you. All auto combat.
Nothing wrong with that, but hey, what ever floats your boat. I like to have fun and be immersed into the games I play. What you listed works against that.
Also, slow and outdated? That is a laugh. Tab-targeting is just as outdated and probably slower XD.
Hmm... I wonder how many others didn't get the point of my sarcastic absurd statement?
Sex... we don't knock it just because it can be described as always more or less the same.
MMOs... typical "anti" posts in these forums knock MMOs for being more or less the same.
"More or less the same" is just a matter of perspective: you can choose to emphasize the similarities or the differences.
It's one of those "glass half full / half empty" things.... and no, playing MMOs is not like filling glasses.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Hariken and Sleepyfish both hit the nail on the head like Batman clocking Superman (we all know who would win that fight, the Bat, hands down).
While I'm intrigued by ESO and will give it a try, I am doing mostly so because of DAoC nostalgia while chasing the ES IP and a few other things. I don't expect to feel like it'll be totally new experience, I'm too much of a jaded old gamer to chew on that pipe anymore. This site alone shows how mired in retreading the industry is, I occassionally hit the game forums listing and go
at all the craptastic games doing the same old thing in different skins. Seriously, I'm appalled at just how long that list of forums is, at least 90% are cheap ME TOO drivel.
WARNING
rant incoming:
MMOs are in a rut, a coffin deep rut perpetuated by the twin forces of conditioned common entertainment models and common tech index slaved to projected profit margins. By "projected" what i mean is CEOs assuming something will make money based upon historical sales of other products of which they usually know zip about past $$$ signs. Which means those damn consoles are going to determine way more the future of MMOs than anything else. yes i console hate, sue me for being unapologetically elitist and politically incorrect that way. When a MMO publisher is catering to consoles, he had to make design concessions, this fact will persist and put a glass ceiling on games until the tech of a console is fully on par with what a PC can do.
Sadly, Sandbox games really are where the future should be headed, actually it should be here now way more than it is, but all too often, themepark invades sandbox as the conditioned habits of console style play manifest over and over again. Skyrim on the console is a joke IMO, as was Oblivion. I remember the literally dropped jaw my nephews had when they came over to my man-cave and watched me play both games on the PC with a robust mod library. I had to do a lot of homework to get my mods to work, and the mod community deserves all the credit for making them and have them play nice with each other. And it wasn't just gfx, it was content. My eldest nephew was in awe of some of the dungeons and play styles that were available through mods, everything from playing a wushu style monk to the magic mods that completely changed how magic was handled in the game. A PC-Modded Skyrim/Oblivion blows the doors off the console versions with no argument possible to the contrary.
Consoles are insert disk, and play. Mimimal fuss, "fair" content for the masses leading to profits for publishers. Thats why there are boss fights in every MMO, scripted in exactly the style of console games. Many like to Blizz-hate with WoW being the evil force dumbing down MMOs, but what Blizz did was react to market forces by taking tapping the console player base and giving them a console style MMO with each expansion further "console-fying" WoW to its present state. Ever see a bright yellow ! over the head of a npc in EQ? One had to explore the world, interact with it, and yes the ultimate evil...read. In modern MMOs the big push is voice and the kids rant at how much better that is. Yet when i quiz them as to what the voice said, their memory retention of what was said is little better than clicking on the big yellow !, clicking accept, and following map waypoints. How much different would a MMO be if there were no icon marked quest givers or map way points for you to know where to go? What if you had to explore your map and lets say you could make in game notes on your map, but no waypoint markers other than what you put down? Would a game like that survive the hordes of console players and their expectations? Perhaps I'm a cynic but I don't think it would.
What MMOs need to do in order to evolve, in a nutshell, is be more like a PC-Skyrim modded game that lets you sandbox according to taste and less the console Skyrim eat-your-chicken-McNugget-and-STFU games. And until consumers stop biting, publishers won't stop making them. And yes, I'm totally guilty of biting with ESO as it is right now, what can I say? I want a nostalgic MMO fix which I will probably hang up in 3-6 months
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
Well I am not going to comment on every single part of this post, since I really do not have much to say, and for the most part agree with you.
However,
"I've also bought B2P games that I played all of 5 hrs and then deleted from my drives, i didn't get much value there compared to someone who bought it and played it for 100 hrs, the potential to not like a game is the same in either case wouldn't you agree?"
Right, you make a valid point. However, the big difference is ... that B2P games, you are able to pick up again at any point in time with out having to pay a dime. The amount of time you play is on you. A P2P game, you pay the $15 a month for that time. Meaning if you do not play it, you didn't get what you payed for. Also, Once you stop paying, you can't pick it back up until you pay again. The amount of time you play directly effects the cost of a P2P, while it does not for a B2P.
For me, i will not gonna play it
gonna straight to others sub game
Seeker728 you sir are awesome. You nailed down everything i feel about where mmo's are going and why its bad. And yes i agree that console's are taking over gaming. That's one of the reason's why new mmo's are so casual. Its that sit on the couch in front of the tv thing. And why pay to play any mmo that's a copy of something else that you played. Think about it of course its your money to do with whatever. Box prices of 60+ dollars for mmo's with subs is just wrong and as long as gamer's buy them it won't ever change. I'M lucky though,i got my favorite mmo back and its totally f2p without a cash shop. Neocron 2 may be an older game but it's community run now. Something a U.S. game company would never let happen. They would just take it down and throw it in a vault. So am glad i get to play my favorite mmo again. Old school graphics and complex skill system a game that makes you use your head and its triple xp weekend now.
Honestly with my experiences in Elder scrolls I would pay anything to play their product. I know it's sad, but I freakin love their games. The only thing I'm going to miss unless they add it later is the random killing NPCs and getting a bounty.
What many people neglect to consider is the fact that even if the game is P2P with a sub, doesn't mean it won't have a cash shop as well.
That is why I'd prefer the game to be B2P like GW2, as most likely even with a subscription the lure of adding a cash shop to milk players further is too tempting.
If it was JUST buy and pay the subscription with no cash shop, that would be fine with me, but I doubt it will go that way as MMO publishers these days all want a piece of the Cash Shop pie, even if they're already charging a sub.
Played: DAoC, AC2, WoW, CoH, GW, GW2, WAR, AoC, Champions Online, Rift, Dragon Nest, Vindictus, Warframe, Neverwinter, Dungeon Fighter Online
Currently Playing: Dungeon Fighter Online Global
Waiting for: None
Indeed Brabbit1987, you are correct. In fact I was thinking of our conversation in this thread just last night when in a fit of curiosity, I reinstalled GW2 on my drive. I own the game and am able to jump back in (clumsily) to the game with no sub and thought how the B2P model does have the consumer friendly advantage of letting me get right back into the action with no immediate further spend (I qualify it with "immediate" since future spends may still be forthcoming and can't rule them out).
I then compared that feeling to when back in January, a old friend of mine managed to wear down my resistance to fire up WoW again with a free 7 day trial he had emailed me and since i hadn't uninstalled the game yet, I honored our friendship and activated the trail. I harbor no ill feelings for those who enjoy the game still mind you, but after about 45 minutes, I exited the game and proceeded to uninstall the game because I knew there is no desire on my part to sub to what WoW had become.
I debated with myself as I wandered around in Lion's Arch last night if I would've been as quick to uninstall WoW were it a B2P model like GW2. I decided that in this particular instance, the P2P model did me a unexpected service, for while I don't hate Blizzard (I just can't stand what WoW has become), the payment model put a firm "NO!" sign infront of me. Were it B2P, I'd leave it on my drive and occasionally dink around in the game before I gagged and left it alone again (I'm odd that way). It doesn't IMO provide a case for either model's virtues, I just thought it was a interesting inner gauge of value where it did me a service, even if it isn't as consumer friendly as B2P is.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
This poll sucks, were is the who cares!!!!!!!! To many of you that voted no need to get a job.... Stop whining you want everything for free....
Instead you pay box price for a game even more sub par. To each his own, I guess.
Anyway, if this game reminds me even a little bit of Skyrim in terms of atmosphere, I'll gladly pay a sub. And from what I've seen so far, it does.
I thank you for your praise Hariken, I promise I won't let it go to my head
I live in Las Vegas and have the luxury of attending all kinds of conferences and knowing people who know people, with a little bit of effort I can find my way into them even if they're not here in town. I've met with game developers and studio officers and privately more than a few have confided that there is plenty of resentment in the industry among dev teams how the pursuit of profit is 1st, 2nd, and 3rd among priorities and that the Suits put gameplay, community and many other features as distant priorities. As an example, one young man I spoke with mentioned how a executive of "a friendly rival" said Bethesda execs were idiots for not charging a license fee for the tool kit and further fees for each mod download made with the kit. This same young man said "He also said 'Gamers are idiots, you can cash shop the fuck out of them so long as the costs are small."
(Mind you, I'm sure there are legal hoops that would have to be jumped, but a corp could set up a eula to serve their agenda to pull this off were it a hurdle previously)
And there were several other individuals present at that dinner who confirmed the quote. Due to possible legal reasons, I hope you'll understand why i don't put out names. That sort of disdain however doesn't surprise me from a high ranking executive, its really no different than the disdain that politicians feel for their constituents and the fleecing of the citizenry they do regularly. The bottom line being, MMO vets are jaded and bored to tears for a very good reason, and things like what the Neocron community is doing worth emulating in other titles. My feelings towards ES products (Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim to be exact) wouldn't be the warm fuzzy glow if not for the mod community who pours so much love and devotion into the titles, especially with zero compensation for their efforts.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
This article sums up my position much better then I could ever write it. http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/10/22/the-soapbox-free-to-play-wasnt-our-idea/#continued
"There's just one problem: Lazy, entitled gamers didn't invent free-to-play. Studios did." "Free-to-play as a business model didn't come from a bunch of gamers sitting around trying to work out ways to take advantage of developers and get something for nothing, it came from savvy executives who spend every waking moment of their lives searching for the most efficient method to separate gamers from their money." - by Mike Foster on Oct 22nd 2013 11:00AM
This spot on. Don't blame the f2p gamer's fun ruining your mmo's. Blame it on greedy suits at game companies. That article say's what i've been saying for awhile now. And also prove's that f2p gamer's bring in more money than sub only player's.
From what I have seen in the various F2P games I've tried, what I hold the playerbase I've encountered accountable for is their behavior, and in general its more toxic than what I've encountered in P2P/B2P models. Then I blame the Suits for allowing such behavior to persist because their answer to all problems is to put a person on /ignore. The only way to curb negative childish behavior is with a spanking, and often companies don't want to spend the money to erect a system to mete out a fair punitive system. Mores the pity really.
Even peace may be purchased at too high a price, and the only time you are completely safe is when you lie in the grave.
i love when people say these things. Implying that the reason behind not willing to pay for a monthly subscription is being unemployed. And then generalising with the "too many of you" type of finger pointing.
Ignorance at its best.
P2P = "more mature"?
Um, does the phrase "Barrens chat" mean anything to you? You know, the monicker for the worst, most immature chat ever -- and it came from a P2P game, not an F2P game.
I hit more immature, elitist snobbery and childishness in WoW than anywhere else -- and again, that's the model of the sub-game.
More mature? I nearly fell out of my chair laughing at that one.
If it wasn't for the stupid people according to you, you wouldn't have a game to play.
You make a good point but how people act is on that person. I can tell you this, I started out playing mmo's back in 2000. People in those early games were good but as the genre became mainstream it got worse in just about every game i've played whether its p2p or f2p. And today there's an equal amount of bad in both types of game's. Its un fair to say that all the bad people are the f2p gamer's. I've met a lot of jerks in p2p game's too. So how do you know that jerk you just met is a f2p player un less the whole game is f2p. The worse people i've ever met in a mmo were p2p Wow players.
I'm not sure I like the article.
In one paragraph he says that f2p essentially helped turn studios around that were hemorrhaging money and that certain games wouldn't exist without it and in another paragraph he indicates that f2p was created by nickel and diming suits. and is a better way to bilk customers out of their money.
Soooo, if a game uses the f2p model they are only thinking of themselves and ways to lift every penny from the player and if they don't use it they might not exist.
And of course studios invented it. Players didn't invent the subscriptoin either it was studios. Essentially companies need to do what they can to survive.
This sound to me like someone who wants to have their cake and eat it too.
Of course companies exist to make money. Do you work at your job "not to make money". If your employer came to you and said "we have to cut your salary 20% but because of this we will be able to give our customers better products would you not reconsider?
The problem here is that both sides seem to be at odds. Companies want to exist, want to pay their employees and good companies want to take care of good employees. Gamers want to pay the least they possibly can pay with the exception of those who want to pay to get out on top. It's like they think it's a club where companies should just get by so that players can have all the games they want for minimal cost. Which make sense we all want to pay the least we can pay and get the most from that buck. But in the end "of course" customers are dollar signs. It's not a club. We aren't all friends. They want money. And "we" as investors want our investments to make money. Are any people here saying that all your investments don't make money? And do you actually keep your money in those investments?
If someone invests in a company that company needs to deliver. If they have a problem with this then don't take investor's money and take your chances.
I'm not for f2p for a variety of reasons but it sounds to me like there is a wide polarization going on here.
There are players who will not pay a dime and they are proud of it. And they think this is a good thing because "they are the content so they are exempt".
I question how valid that is.
Now that I think of it I'll say that "some players helped create f2p". How? Developers saw that rmt was huge and that that plaeyrs were clearly willing to pay money outside of the game in order to get benefits. Developers were spending money to fight rmt traders, power levellers, essentially any third party that was willing to offer perks and services to players. So instead developers decided to head these third parties off at the pass and give players what they wanted. Allow them to spend money on things that they desired.
It's a viscous circle.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You missed the point entirely, good job.
My point was, that no one is MAKING you buy it. You can easily play a F2P game entirely free if you so choose. So it is only more then $15 a month if you choose to make it more. It's your choice. If you are to stupid to make a simple choice, that is your own fault.
I am not saying to not buy anything or if you do you are stupid. I am saying if you buy it just to buy it because it's there .. then you are stupid. I personally don't know anyone who does this. However, that is what is being implied if one says you pay more on a F2P game then a P2P. That isn't true at all. You can, but again, it's your own choice. It isn't forced on you at all. You simply pay what you want or what you feel is worth paying for.
Either way you wont get people to play a game with a war of semantics.All games in existence is not the debate but this game is. Would I pay for some games, sure. Would I play a ftp game, sure. Would I pay for this game when a game almost just like it is out there for box price, no.