Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
A Moderator can Close this Thread... Thank you.
This discussion has been closed.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Comments
The entire early MMORPG subscription time sinks to get more money is total fabrication. There were MUDs with longer leveling times and more progression and time sinks than Everquest that were completely free. It's asinine to try and say a flat subscription fee that is capped is anything even close to the cash grab of no ceiling spending going on in most F2P games.
How can you possibly say F2P isn't significantly more business driven when the sub model literally had a hard cap on the spending?
As far as P2W advantages and this whole disgusting trend, I hope P2W and F2P die in a fire. I want to actually kill the dragon to get the loot, play the game to get my xp and levels and gear, not open my wallet for the item mall that's pretending to be a game.
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/In the early days of EQ, there were people that were spending thousands of dollars a month to gain major advantages over ever other player in the game. This (an similar behavior in other games a the time) kicked off a multi-billion dollar industry in RMT that to this day still dominates most of the games out there.
The current mix of monthly subs, cash shops, services, etc are mostly a response to this. They are an attempt to meet the demand (that will be met anyways) while maintaining a level of control, security, and profit. The reality is that as long as people can pay (someone) for items/services in games, P2W will exist. It is a direct result of monetization. The best solution is to find ways to manage the issue, and to make it good for the game, rather than bad.
This article on timesinks is from the lead designer of City of Heroes. He openly admits that the purpose of timesinks is to sell longer subscriptions.
But you shouldn't even need that hard evidence that you're wrong. Just look at the history of all gaming and realize that within 3 years of subscription-based gaming being a thing, timesinks had risen to become part of just the one genre selling time. Prior to that there were almost no timesink-intensive games at all. How much more obvious can they make it? Oh, right...by a lead designer flat out telling you that's how it works.
If your measure of business-driven is the spending cap, then sure modern games are more business-driven.
If your measure of business-driven is whether players are prevented from playing the game until they fork over money, then no modern games certainly aren't more business-driven because you can play all these F2P games and know exactly how much fun you're having before you hand over a single dollar.
As for your closing statement, can you even name one single MMORPG where you can buy an item that you'd otherwise have to kill a boss for?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
"Beating skill challenges?" Surely you jest. You hit the right buttons in the right order at the right time (available through search) = "win".
Hell, they even tell you when you are ready for whatever, with colors. And a guide in the guise of a Pez Dispenser at yer nearest quest hub.
LOL at the MMO gaming industry. No wonder gamers are bored.
Once upon a time....
Uh, buttons represent decisions. Yes, you'll win if you make the right decisions. Making and executing the right decisions is what skill is.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Does anyone sell numbered sticky dots through their cash shops yet?
MMO's are kind of like doing the Macarena!
Over and over and over again.
MMO's are also sort of like a shotgun wedding...
If you want the goodies, you'll have to pay for them!
Once upon a time....
That doesn't change the fact that there were completely free MUDs that had more timesinks than EQ or City of Heroes. Where there is no motivation to sell anything and yet still the time sinks are there purely for gameplay purposes. So no timesinks are not just about selling longer subs.
How the hell is business driven anything but making more money? To that end subs limit spending...
Have you not seen pretty much every game with a cash shop offer cash shop only items that one simply can not get by playing the game? If it's only in the cash shop it's not dropping as loot and the only way you get it is by opening your wallet. When I play a game if I see someone with some cool item and look it up and instead of some crazy dragon boss kill they just paid money...
"classification of games into MMOs is not by rational reasoning" - nariusseldon
Love Minecraft. And check out my Youtube channel OhCanadaGamer
Try a MUD today at http://www.mudconnect.com/Just as there were non commercial games with timesinks, there were non commercial games with item shops. Based on your logic, this would mean that Items being exclusive to the shop (and not being dropped in game) are also not about selling more stuff. Non commercial games, are often just like commercial games, but they dont take money. They dont usually have a different design philosophy or approach.
Before the popular use of subs in games, the common payment method was by the minute. This was also a pay for time approach, and the sub was just a way to ensure a larger block of time (people often only played for minutes a day). Neither the pay by the minute, or pay by the month (for unlimited time) had any effect on capping spending. They just limited the ways that a company could earn an income. Over the years it became clear that third parties were more than willing to provide the goods/services that players were willing to pay for, to the detriment of the companies that ran the games.
You could either closed the shop entirely, or make every item cost:
$0.25
$0.50
or
$0.75
but no higher. Games that charge $1.00 up to $25.00 and over are severely out of touch with the middle to lower income situation.
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to. Relax....."
"Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
From my perspective, that's a lot of beans and bread...."Investment firms do not have that outlook on life. They need to know there is not only a return on their investment but also a solid profit at the end of it." tawess-
Whether you want to poke fun at it or not, the presence of decisions are what enables a game to be played skillfully, and button presses (skill choices) are the way those decisions are made in a MMORPG.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The big picture:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Your Themepark games don't have button choices. They have predetermined button orders. (Available through a search, usually found on powerbroker sites or sites linking to such.)
Once upon a time....
The problem the free to play freeloader have is leverage. They aren't paying money so the only thing they can do is walk away. What they have to do is create an argument that clearly demonstrates a profit incentive to the business running the game. It has to be in terms of what the segment of players not currently spending money would do to spend money. It can't be about the spenders. It also can't be some pie in the sky idea or one that risks driving away the payers.
Any solution to the alleged problem will fail if it doesn't show how it WILL make more money.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Powerbroker sites? Are you talking about gold-selling sites, and suggesting that players "usually" find their rotations from those sites?
Look, I'm discussing reality -- what actually happens -- so I can't really speak to this strange fabrication of yours. It only exists in your head, so I can't discuss it, sorry.
But meanwhile in reality, the more opportunities there are to fail, the more a game will reward skill. Decisions offer that opportunity to fail, and skill buttons are a big source of decisions in MMORPGs. A complicated rotation will provide even more opportunities to fail, and reward skill even more. The only time this skill won't be important is if it's trumped by another factor (like world PVP where you bring 20 teammates and it doesn't matter if you're good at your rotation you're going to cream your solo opponent.)
Whether a game is themepark is completely unrelated to whether it offers deep skill-rewarding gameplay or not (though at the "pure sandbox" end of the spectrum where measurable goals stop existing, skill does stop existing.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
My issue will awalys be this.
Time = Money
So I have no job and can play 24/7 as long as I want period. So I can put ion 100+ hours every week and get to see have everything in the game first and then begin denying that same enjoyment to others if I am on a PVP server.
On the other hand
I work 60 hours a week and have money I can spend on my entertainment. So I play 25 hours but buy my stuff from the cash shop. This way I can enjoy the game and keep up with my friends. I also can defend myself in PVP as my gear does not completly suck.
So as long as player can play 100+ hour a week players should be able to purchase from a cash shop so I can stay close to equal footing. So why are we not also talking what method to limit those who play 100+ in a game vs those that spend 100+ dollars in a game?
I rest my case.
Hell, your Themepark creations even take out randomness as much as possible to facilitate your formulas. Something games do today exactly because you want to create this Button-in-the-Right-Order game play.
"DING!"
Once upon a time....
You're in the wrong thread.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Your final question is a good point.
First though, to adress the first part of your comments, that doesn't really change anything. The players who can play 100 hours a week generally are being fed in RL somehow. And being as addicted as they are, many will find money to spend on the game and still be far ahead of you if you can't spend that time. So this isn't an answer.
Your final point has been addressed before in the gaming producers' community. And of course they have always found a way to screw that up too.
If I were making a Sandbox game (because I wouldn't touch a Themepark, but then I don't have a career to worry about there), I would give each account multiple characters, and then require each character to have "sleep" or lose effectiveness. Logging off that character would be "sleep". After, say, 5 hours of game play the characters would get tired, and then a required resting period of 5 hours to regain effectiveness. A tired character would still be able to do some things but be hampered in effectiveness.
Meanwhile, I'd add in "well rested" for characters that have been logged off for something like 18 hours. And that would allow bonuses for skill gain and success chances in trade skills.
The times I mentioned is one way to go, but I'd rather tie it to food and stamina use, activity in the game. But the overall structure would work about the same time wise.
Once upon a time....
Up yers. You guys don't want answers to problems. You want continuation of the problems only covered up with something that can be sold to the community.
I'm so fucking tired of this sort of crap that just leads to more of the same old bullshit.
Once upon a time....
With the realization that there are DIFFERENT types of players, there has to be the realization of DIFFERENT ways to pay for the game. An example of how this can be done (well) is Eve. Its monetization (Purchase + Sub + Cash Shop) works well because of the addition of PLEX. It works, based on these assumptions:
1. Items (once in game) are fully exchangeable. This means that there are no (or very little) 'locked' or 'bound' items. In game items/currency is very fluid.
2. Monthly Subs (in the form of PLEX) can be traded for currency, and currency for all the items in the game. This allows a valuable exchange between those who have time, and those who have money.
Allowing players who have money to buy the best stuff in the game is extremely P2W. However, because they have to buy it from other players (who have to earn it in game), this creates a balance that is acceptable. It is quite different than selling items that are created out of nowhere. Direct purchases of game items/benefits/features from the developer (or third party) create an imbalance between spenders and non spenders, as the offering is one sided. However, selling items to the buyers that must be traded to other players (to get the value) creates a stong dynamic, where P2W is much more beneficial, than it is detrimental.
Or maybe we do this stuff for a living and are trying to explain how these things really do work.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
"However, selling items to the buyers that must be traded to other players (to get the value) creates a stong dynamic, where P2W is much more beneficial, than it is detrimental."
So it's P2W.
And as I just said to Loktofeit (quoted above):
Me: "You want continuation of the problems only covered up with something that can be sold to the community."
Once upon a time....