Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Are hardcore mmo devs delusional?

16791112

Comments

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    Brainy said:
    Kyleran said:


    *The good:  After the change which broke the game space into PvP and PvE worlds, the player base and income nearly doubled (we went from 125k to 245k subs).  So from a fiscal responsibility standpoint it was a totally winning move.*

    *The bad:  Without the "sheep to shear" the hard core PvP'ers were disenfranchised.  They didn't like preying on each other (hard targets versus soft targets), and they became a smaller minority in the overall game.  The real bad though was that the intensity and "realness" of the game for all players was diminished.  This was the major unintended consequence.*


    This is exactly what a delusional dev sounds like.

    So let me understand this.
    • He admits he doubled the numbers with the PVE Patch. 
    • He admits he completely stopping the customer abandonment and had way better retention with the PVE Patch. 
    • He admits that way more PVE'ers quit due to the ganking and only a fraction of those came back, which was still DOUBLE the numbers.

    Yet this guy wants force all the PVE players into new servers so the 5% of ganker PVP customers wouldnt leave?

    So clueless.  If they didnt implement the PVE split, then they would have lost the entire PVE population AND THE PVP population LOL.  There was no way the majority of players  would have switched servers and left everything behind.

    Maybe this delusion dev could one day get a clue and understand the reason they didnt get more PVE'ers back is they didnt go far enough fast enough.

    • Maybe if they didnt spend all their time, creating a new FACTION PVP area that flopped, and instead spent that time building PVE dungeons and PVE content.
    • Maybe if they didnt give the PVP area 2x all the resources and skill gains.
    • Maybe if they didnt make a policy where people in PVP zones could have 5 houses, but if you build 1 PVE house then you lose all your other houses.
    • Maybe if the PVE area had more housing areas, people couldnt even find land, yet the PVP zone was completely empty.
    • Maybe if they didnt give PVP all the rewards, while PVE players get nothing.
    • Maybe if they didnt give all the PVP areas all the hookups.

    I am not sure whether to facepalm or bang my head against a wall. That they would deliberately offer a part of the playerbase a bad experience to make another part happier when they are both paying the exact same sub is unfathomable. I am flabbergasted that they knew this so early on and there are still developers who don't understand players don't want to be preyed upon and that that experience isn't why they play.

  • AmarantharAmaranthar Member EpicPosts: 5,851
    edited February 17
    Brainy said:
    Kyleran said:


    *The good:  After the change which broke the game space into PvP and PvE worlds, the player base and income nearly doubled (we went from 125k to 245k subs).  So from a fiscal responsibility standpoint it was a totally winning move.*

    *The bad:  Without the "sheep to shear" the hard core PvP'ers were disenfranchised.  They didn't like preying on each other (hard targets versus soft targets), and they became a smaller minority in the overall game.  The real bad though was that the intensity and "realness" of the game for all players was diminished.  This was the major unintended consequence.*


    This is exactly what a delusional dev sounds like.

    So let me understand this.
    • He admits he doubled the numbers with the PVE Patch. 
    • He admits he completely stopping the customer abandonment and had way better retention with the PVE Patch. 
    • He admits that way more PVE'ers quit due to the ganking and only a fraction of those came back, which was still DOUBLE the numbers.

    Yet this guy wants force all the PVE players into new servers so the 5% of ganker PVP customers wouldnt leave?

    So clueless.  If they didnt implement the PVE split, then they would have lost the entire PVE population AND THE PVP population LOL.  There was no way the majority of players  would have switched servers and left everything behind.

    Maybe this delusion dev could one day get a clue and understand the reason they didnt get more PVE'ers back is they didnt go far enough fast enough.

    • Maybe if they didnt spend all their time, creating a new FACTION PVP area that flopped, and instead spent that time building PVE dungeons and PVE content.
    • Maybe if they didnt give the PVP area 2x all the resources and skill gains.
    • Maybe if they didnt make a policy where people in PVP zones could have 5 houses, but if you build 1 PVE house then you lose all your other houses.
    • Maybe if the PVE area had more housing areas, people couldnt even find land, yet the PVP zone was completely empty.
    • Maybe if they didnt give PVP all the rewards, while PVE players get nothing.
    • Maybe if they didnt give all the PVP areas all the hookups.

    Some of that doesn't look right to me, maybe I just don't remember it though. 
    But you're right about the point. Even with a PvP system that works, the focus has to be on the PvE. 

    Being such a "worldly" game, and with all of the choices a player had, they could have advanced that stuff, plus the GM events, and really kicked arse. 
    Instead, they wasted a lot of effort trying to cater to the PvPers.
    Of course, that's what they had left, primarily, by the time they went to Trammel. So I guess they had to keep them happy. Such a trap they built for themselves. 

    I'm still madly in love with that "worldly" part that they had in UO, the "rest of the game" as I said before. There is so much room to improve that aspect in MMORPGs, and that's my dream game, sans the player abuse parts. 

    Once upon a time....

  • BrainyBrainy Member EpicPosts: 2,163
    Some of that doesn't look right to me, maybe I just don't remember it though. 


    Thats a vague statement, what part in particular are you talking about?

    Those bullets are all correct.
    Even with all those PVE negatives and PVP advantages, the PVE zone was so busy you couldnt find land after the first day.  It was all gone.

    If you were like me and had multiple castles and houses, you were stuck having to stay in PVP zones or lose all your other houses if you build 1 new PVE house.

    At first I personally didnt mind, because I had my own city, and 2x resources was nice because essentially the PVP zone turned into a PVE zone because without the newbies all the gankers quit.

    But my vendors sufferered, nobody wanted to go to PVP lands vendor.  So I couldnt sell my loot or resources or anything.  I was pretty much out of business.



    Ungood
  • BrainyBrainy Member EpicPosts: 2,163
    It's a matter of expectations.  Albion Online as of a year ago had over 300k "active users".  I think by ANY measure Albion Online has been a success and thus refutes your statement

    Don't fall into the trap of making an echo chamber.  There are players that like full loot open world PvP.  But they also want a fun game that includes this feature.  The feature alone is not sufficient.

    As for your first sentence.. well.. yeah.. red flag :)


    LOL so the only game you can point to for full loot in MMO's is Albion?

    Lets compare apples to apples.  When Albion cost actual money for everyone to play, they dropped below 450 concurrent players.  Their CEO quit for a 100k job.

    After that they went 100% free.  So is there a market for 100% free games?  Yes.
    They made the game now where 1% of the Whales with Pay to Win, can dominate/support the other 99% of free players.

    I am not going to say its not successful, because its all on definitions and what you compare it too.  I also dont know how many of those accounts are bot accounts.  295k of those accounts could be bot accounts for all I know.  Does this game support a small team?  Yes.  Its making 6mil a year last I heard.  Not bad, but certainly not anywhere close to the big MMO's.

    Also doesnt Eve Online need to be added to the list?  I am pretty sure it made way way more than Albion did at its prime.



    Ungood
  • BrainyBrainy Member EpicPosts: 2,163
    To be clear, I am not saying PVP in MMO's could not work.  The problem is the formula is not balanced.  The dev teams constantly cater to the no rules / ganker crowd of PVPers.

    When you look at other games in other genres, like World of tanks/Warships.  In these games PVP is the most popular mode.  They are not putting Teir 11 vets againt Teir 1 newbs.
    Additionally they have match makers that balance the teams based on win% so Everyone has a chance to win sometimes.

    Obviously there are a bunch of PVP minded gamers, but having the top Tier pray on the lowest tier all the time is clearly a losing formula.  The name of the Thread is why MMO pvp games are not popular compared to other genre's, Delusional Devs.
    Ungood
  • WargfootWargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,406
    Wargfoot said:
    A little off topic, but insight into the 'hardcore' guys when they actually get the love they claim they desire:

    lolpng

    Readable Version: I was playing as a red player, and once a day it have to pay 10k + getting hunted / zerged down by 10 sheriffs. Thats what im talking abut


    How exactly does that system work? 
    I don't participate.

    What I've gathered is reds can be looted of everything they're carrying if killed.  The sheriffs only lose stuff in inventory, but not the expensive gear they're wearing.  If a sheriff kills a red the sheriff can send the red to jail and the PK must sit in that jail for 48 real hours or pay a 10K fine.   The 10K fine is split between the sheriff and the town hosting the jail.

    So even if reds round around naked, they're profitable to kill.
    Kyleran
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,975
    Here's the quoted part that I don't get.

    "The real bad though was that the intensity and "realness" of the game for all players was diminished.  This was the major unintended consequence.*"

    I'm not sure why he talks about this as negative thing.  

    I seek neither realness or intensity in gaming, especially when I'm normally the prey.


    "True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde 

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 17,585
    Brainy said:
    It's a matter of expectations.  Albion Online as of a year ago had over 300k "active users".  I think by ANY measure Albion Online has been a success and thus refutes your statement

    Don't fall into the trap of making an echo chamber.  There are players that like full loot open world PvP.  But they also want a fun game that includes this feature.  The feature alone is not sufficient.

    As for your first sentence.. well.. yeah.. red flag :)


    LOL so the only game you can point to for full loot in MMO's is Albion?

    Lets compare apples to apples.  When Albion cost actual money for everyone to play, they dropped below 450 concurrent players.  Their CEO quit for a 100k job.

    After that they went 100% free.  So is there a market for 100% free games?  Yes.
    They made the game now where 1% of the Whales with Pay to Win, can dominate/support the other 99% of free players.

    I am not going to say its not successful, because its all on definitions and what you compare it too.  I also dont know how many of those accounts are bot accounts.  295k of those accounts could be bot accounts for all I know.  Does this game support a small team?  Yes.  Its making 6mil a year last I heard.  Not bad, but certainly not anywhere close to the big MMO's.

    Also doesnt Eve Online need to be added to the list?  I am pretty sure it made way way more than Albion did at its prime.



    It’s not a popularity contest no matter how hard you try to make it one. You can make a successful full loot PvP open world game. Thats the point. It has to be a good game. Just saying “we have full loot” is meaningless. Albion made a complete and reasonably fun game and were rewarded by lots of players and they made plenty of money.

    It’s not enough money for an EA or Microsoft. They want mega hits and there you need to target the biggest chunk of players and that’s not a full loot game. But Albion is exactly what a niche game should be. A game that targets a subset of players and delivers a game that appeals to enough of them to be profitable.


    Sovrath

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Kyleran said:
    Wargfoot said:
    A little off topic, but insight into the 'hardcore' guys when they actually get the love they claim they desire:

    lolpng

    Readable Version: I was playing as a red player, and once a day it have to pay 10k + getting hunted / zerged down by 10 sheriffs. Thats what im talking abut


    Thing is, it's a tricky balance. The argument is often made if you are going to punish PKs so harshly that very few will be willing to be one, why bother spending the resources to have open world PVP at all?

    Better I think to have PVP restricted to specific zones like DAOC does or even EVE maybe with its relatively safe high sec area.


    This goes back to knowing your target market

    Who is this game for?

    I am, and will always be, of the firm belief that there is nothing inherently wrong with any direct style of game. That means, there is nothing inherently bad about a FLOW-PVP games, and @Wargfoot is even suggesting things like having house keys, taking that "Full Loot" to next levels, with looting a persons home instance, burning down their house, killing their dog, and just robbing and destroying everything they could ever possess in the game

    And maybe that is what some players desire, maybe these games need to be even more brutal to be honest, to really cater to and entice target demographic

    The thing is, the people that play these games wonder why I will not play them, because, I am not their target demographic dumbass!

    I am not going to be your content, and if you can't handle playing among other people that want FLOW-PvP games, when you want a FLOW-PVP, you're the sissy bitch, not me.

    I like PvE, I like PvP, my full set of Legendary WvW/PvP Armor in GW2, being Testament to this, I also like playing a game where I keep my shit, again, my full set of legendary armor being testament to that, so if a dev wants me to play their game, they need to target my demographic

    For the players that say stupid shit like "But my FLOW-PVP game the best crafting system of any game ever made, and you won't get to experience it's pure unbridled fucking awesomeness!" you're right, I won't, and I am fine with that.

    I also won't experience any of the other whatever the fucks you think make your game great, and again, I am fine with that.

    Once those methods fail, that is when all these FLOW-PvP players Call me names like Coward, Wimp, whatever! Like that's going to inspire me to pay with assholes like you. But the real thing here is, those FLOW-PVP games need players like me to join to provide content, I don't need you in mine, which one of us really wins?

    So again, when a Dev goes to design a game, they really need to think about who this game is for. "Everyone and Anyone" is not an answer, that means you have no idea what the fuck you are doing.
    KyleranKidRisk
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • BrainyBrainy Member EpicPosts: 2,163
    Ungood said:
    That means, there is nothing inherently bad about a FLOW-PVP games, and @Wargfoot is even suggesting things like having house keys, taking that "Full Loot" to next levels, with looting a persons home instance, burning down their house, killing their dog, and just robbing and destroying everything they could ever possess in the game

    And maybe that is what some players desire, maybe these games need to be even more brutal to be honest, to really cater to and entice target demographic

    The thing is, the people that play these games wonder why I will not play them, because, I am not their target demographic dumbass!

    Well the problem is they dont want to be the victim either.  They love dishing out, but they cant take it.

    The demo for this needs casuals and newbs to play or else they cant farm them.  So they rely on PVE players to victimize in order to have fun.

    In other genres they level the playing field so people have a decent chance to win/lose.  But in MMO full loot PVP, the devs let people greif/gank/kill/steal/piss off/camp newbs and casuals all day.

    Ungood
  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Member LegendaryPosts: 17,585
    Brainy said:
    Ungood said:
    That means, there is nothing inherently bad about a FLOW-PVP games, and @Wargfoot is even suggesting things like having house keys, taking that "Full Loot" to next levels, with looting a persons home instance, burning down their house, killing their dog, and just robbing and destroying everything they could ever possess in the game

    And maybe that is what some players desire, maybe these games need to be even more brutal to be honest, to really cater to and entice target demographic

    The thing is, the people that play these games wonder why I will not play them, because, I am not their target demographic dumbass!

    Well the problem is they dont want to be the victim either.  They love dishing out, but they cant take it.

    The demo for this needs casuals and newbs to play or else they cant farm them.  So they rely on PVE players to victimize in order to have fun.

    In other genres they level the playing field so people have a decent chance to win/lose.  But in MMO full loot PVP, the devs let people greif/gank/kill/steal/piss off/camp newbs and casuals all day.

    Poorly designed ones... sure.  Just like poorly designed PvE games suck.


    Everyone has their own tastes.  To me I love the risk, but it has to have a reward carrot.  Encourage me to take the risk
    Sovrath

    All time classic  MY NEW FAVORITE POST!  (Keep laying those bricks)

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Proudly wearing the Harbinger badge since Dec 23, 2017. 

    Coined the phrase "Role-Playing a Development Team" January 2018

    "Oddly Slap is the main reason I stay in these forums." - Mystichaze April 9th 2018

  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member EpicPosts: 4,522
    Brainy said:
    After that they went 100% free.  So is there a market for 100% free games?  Yes.
    They made the game now where 1% of the Whales with Pay to Win, can dominate/support the other 99% of free players.


    There is no market for 100% free games as such are not marketed. There is a market for games where optional payments provide sufficient profit such that they are worth keeping in operation.
    Kyleran
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Brainy said:
    Ungood said:
    That means, there is nothing inherently bad about a FLOW-PVP games, and @Wargfoot is even suggesting things like having house keys, taking that "Full Loot" to next levels, with looting a persons home instance, burning down their house, killing their dog, and just robbing and destroying everything they could ever possess in the game

    And maybe that is what some players desire, maybe these games need to be even more brutal to be honest, to really cater to and entice target demographic

    The thing is, the people that play these games wonder why I will not play them, because, I am not their target demographic dumbass!

    Well the problem is they dont want to be the victim either.  They love dishing out, but they cant take it.

    The demo for this needs casuals and newbs to play or else they cant farm them.  So they rely on PVE players to victimize in order to have fun.

    In other genres they level the playing field so people have a decent chance to win/lose.  But in MMO full loot PVP, the devs let people greif/gank/kill/steal/piss off/camp newbs and casuals all day.

    This all goes back to knowing your market

    I mentioned that the Devs should be asking the deep questions, finding out what really makes that demographic tick, what will pull them in and hold them

    You talked about how they should have market specialist that already know this shit before they even start to build the game. And you make a great point, if you are going to spend millions making a game, investing at least some of that into hiring people that know the market, makes sense

    While I believe that games should find and target the fuck out of a demographic, they need to know what those players want as well, so they can target them

    It's not enough to simply say "We are going to make a FLOW-PVP game" thinking that is all you need to do to attract that demographic, you also need to know what will get them to play your game, and more importantly, stay with it.

    I will say, that's not an easy task, because the traditional rewards that suck in a player like myself, shiny gear and loot bullshit, won't work to attract me to that game either, nor will it hold the players that want to loot each other, because, that whole Full Loot thing going on

    So in that venture, The Devs need to ask those deep questions, they need to really dig into what would keep these players in the game?

    At the core of it all, what will hold them, keep them around, and playing with each other?

    No joke, that becomes a pretty tough question and feat, when by what you said, they don't even want to play with each other, for the most part.

    Are the Dev's Crazy?

    Eh, I think they have just a huge case of being sold a mine full of fools gold, thinking they hit pay dirt, but, as you and others said, they are being scammed, they are being fed a dishonest ruse by the very people encouraging them to go dig that mine and make that game

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    Kyleran
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • WargfootWargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,406
    Ungood said:

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    They could start by asking players "How many games have you played?".

    If the player responds with every game developed since 1995 then for the love of all that is decent, don't listen to a damn thing they have to say!

    A person who has played all those games will only have 3 weeks to enjoy your title, crap all over it, and move on.  Find players who stick with a game for the long term and make those people happy.
    KyleranUngood
  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member EpicPosts: 4,522
    Wargfoot said:
    Ungood said:

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    They could start by asking players "How many games have you played?".

    If the player responds with every game developed since 1995 then for the love of all that is decent, don't listen to a damn thing they have to say!

    A person who has played all those games will only have 3 weeks to enjoy your title, crap all over it, and move on.  Find players who stick with a game for the long term and make those people happy.

    Why should they care? A steady stream of newcomers can be as profitable as a committed static audience, likely even more so in games that rely mostly on buy to play for their profitability.

    The advice provided by players of earliest of MMORPGs is suited to only those games that wish to mimic the business model at that time, purchase of the game and expansions with a mandatory, ongoing subscription. In such conditions the only path to profit is a focus on game improvement.

    Good luck with that these days. Only two MMORPGs can so demand, and even they supplement their revenue through cash shops.
    kitarad
  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    edited February 19
    Wargfoot said:
    Ungood said:

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    They could start by asking players "How many games have you played?".

    If the player responds with every game developed since 1995 then for the love of all that is decent, don't listen to a damn thing they have to say!

    A person who has played all those games will only have 3 weeks to enjoy your title, crap all over it, and move on.  Find players who stick with a game for the long term and make those people happy.

    Why should they care? A steady stream of newcomers can be as profitable as a committed static audience, likely even more so in games that rely mostly on buy to play for their profitability.

    The advice provided by players of earliest of MMORPGs is suited to only those games that wish to mimic the business model at that time, purchase of the game and expansions with a mandatory, ongoing subscription. In such conditions the only path to profit is a focus on game improvement.

    Good luck with that these days. Only two MMORPGs can so demand, and even they supplement their revenue through cash shops.
    I agree with this. It is no longer the thing developers look at.

    It's actually more profitable if you have a cash shop and other ways to get your player base to spend to constantly get new players who stay for  bit and come back every time new content like battle passes come out. I hate this shit but obviously many players do spend and whales spend even more.

    So keeping people long term like they used to when MMORPGs like Everquest came out isn't the goal. They just need regular ways to get people to spend. See raiders only raid on raid day and disappear during the week and you cannot get them to spend. The players that spend money are the new ones who are playing catch up.

    Since you are not relying on a monthly sub so how long they play isn't a relevant question. More relevant is how much will they spend to get an advantage or to finish a grind to obtain gear. Of course you cannot ask that directly but there is enough data out there on other games to give you an idea of the what players are willing to spend money on. 

    The sickening bit is when you need to buy a resource to push up the difficulty of a dungeon or reduce the number of failures to enhancing your gear. Surprisingly good number as this mechanic is a developer favourite.

  • BrainyBrainy Member EpicPosts: 2,163
    Ungood said:

    Eh, I think they have just a huge case of being sold a mine full of fools gold, thinking they hit pay dirt, but, as you and others said, they are being scammed, they are being fed a dishonest ruse by the very people encouraging them to go dig that mine and make that game


    I think there are people that want games devs to essentially build games like in real life a game preserve for hunters.

    People hunt deer, some even hunt moose and bears.  But these people are going in with huge advantages and essentially killing EZ prey.  They are not going in bare handed against a bear.  They dont want an even fight.  They use stealth, range, technology to get an overwhelming advantage.

    Just like in games, they are willing to pay money for the opportunity to prey on newbs for kicks.

    The problem is, people dont want to be deer.  Its not fun to be a deer, Elk or Bear against something with that many overwhelming advantages.

    If they were being hunted, they wouldnt have fun.  So thats the rub, they need prey, but dont want to be the prey.  Its not really sustainable.  The only way to do it, is to lure the prey in with PVP rewards, XP bonuses, extra resources ...  However over the years, many PVE'ers have just stopped playing these games altogether. 

    So the games like Albion are making the game free, and living off whales.  The next obvious step is for games to actually PAY players to be victims.
    Ungood
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Wargfoot said:
    Ungood said:

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    They could start by asking players "How many games have you played?".

    If the player responds with every game developed since 1995 then for the love of all that is decent, don't listen to a damn thing they have to say!

    A person who has played all those games will only have 3 weeks to enjoy your title, crap all over it, and move on.  Find players who stick with a game for the long term and make those people happy.

    Why should they care? A steady stream of newcomers can be as profitable as a committed static audience, likely even more so in games that rely mostly on buy to play for their profitability.

    The advice provided by players of earliest of MMORPGs is suited to only those games that wish to mimic the business model at that time, purchase of the game and expansions with a mandatory, ongoing subscription. In such conditions the only path to profit is a focus on game improvement.

    Good luck with that these days. Only two MMORPGs can so demand, and even they supplement their revenue through cash shops.
    The thing is, it's much harder to get that steady stream of new players as time moves on, and even harder if your game has a box price, and stupid hard if you have a sub on top of that.

    This is really the case if you do not have a strong core of loyal costumers to both entice more people to join, and be there for them to interact with, your game is at best, going to limp along, it's not going to thrive

    See, It's a super cool effect for MMO's where the more people you have, the more people you attract, and the more people you keep, this is why games talk about their population so much, and why it is such an important aspect for both gamers and developers, no one wants to log into a game that feels like a wasteland with no one around them

    This is also why it is such a panic mode when a game starts to lose players, especially if it starts to lose it's core player base. While they may not lose money from player loss, because the players that are leaving are not spenders, and those that stay are whales, so it's not a matter of money for F2P games, but a matter of that core population being content for other payers to interact with.

    In PvE MMO's that population is a super powerful sell point for them get players to spend money, this is also why GW2 brags like mother fuckers about how friendly their players are. See, when a new player joins the game, they log in and there are people around them, for them to interact, chat, ask for help, do quests and events with, and because those (friendly) players are there, they are engaging, suddenly the new player now fucking loves this game and wants to spend all their money on it

    The mechanics alone are not what is going to hold all the social players, or get them to dump money into the game, they can find that same shit in a dozen other MMO's, so whatever your selling, is not special.

    It's your player base that will make or break your game overall.

    This is why games have gone Free to Play, they would rather lose whatever money they could make on a box sale and a sub, just to have those players give their game a sense of population, activity, and a social community.

    Assuming those free players are not complete raving assholes, of course.

    Now when F2P first started it showed to be somewhat more profitable then Subs, but that quickly changed, as the mindset of the players changed to adapt to the F2P gaming market.

    Just to understand how that played out, DDO when it launched it's ground breaking F2P system, bucking the trend that MMO's could not go F2P, ended up making around 17 dollars a player back in 2012.

    That burst of spending died pretty quick however as the novelty wore off, and of course the rise and fall of the P2W epidemic that plagued a lot of MMO's and Online Games.

    Now days GW2 has around twice the population that EQ1 had at it's peak, however EQ1 through subs and box sales, made over twice what GW2 makes annually

    Item shops are not this gold bullet that some people think they are, they are a means of survival in a changing landscape

    But, all games need that population to ensure their games do not feel dead, and games that feel dead, don't thrive.
    Kyleran
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    edited February 19
    Brainy said:
    So the games like Albion are making the game free, and living off whales.  The next obvious step is for games to actually PAY players to be victims.
    NGL, that would work for me

    If some company was willing to pay me reasonable wage to let players kick my ass as I nerd raged about it, and cried that they were being mean to me.. yah.. I'd fucking do that.

    I wouldn't be alone either, a lot of basement dwellers smelly ass bastards would jump on that shit. I mean, no joke, most of them would be like really fucking bad at it, be like "HA HA Fuck you I am being paid" or some shit, because they stupid, but that is also why they are basement dwellers.

    But pay a asshole like me for that shit.. I'd make sure I inflated those ganking fuckwads e-peen to massive proportions every time they kicked my ass in the game, Pay me good, and I'd cry like I a gave a fuck, every single time!

    Legit, would be great remote work, you might be on to something with this idea
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • WargfootWargfoot Member EpicPosts: 1,406
    edited February 19
    Brainy said:

    So the games like Albion are making the game free, and living off whales.  The next obvious step is for games to actually PAY players to be victims.
    This is the only valid application of AI.

    Create AI that has a Facebook page, posts pictures, and plays the game.  The AI makes reasonable posts on Discord for a few weeks and then the AI gets ganked in the game, whinges on the forums and then does a huge public rage-quit.

    All the griefers just got a huge dose of satisfaction for attaining their end goal and nobody really got hurt.

    You could have thousands of these running around dropping loot.

    Then as a developer, you pretend to listen to the AI bots about nerfing the griefers due to 'funding issues'.   Sit back and watch the red whales throw tons of cash at you to keep the orgy funded.

    Then after a griefer leaves the game you let him know he never actually managed to kill a real player - they were all AI bots, just to crush the tiny, shrivel, worm that is his soul.


    UngoodBrainy
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Wargfoot said:
    Brainy said:

    So the games like Albion are making the game free, and living off whales.  The next obvious step is for games to actually PAY players to be victims.
    This is the only valid application of AI.

    Create AI that has a Facebook page, posts pictures, and plays the game.  The AI makes reasonable posts on Discord for a few weeks and then the AI gets ganked in the game, whinges on the forums and then does a huge public rage-quit.

    All the griefers just got a huge dose of satisfaction for attaining their end goal and nobody really got hurt.

    You could have thousands of these running around dropping loot.

    Then as a developer, you pretend to listen to the AI bots about nerfing the griefers due to 'funding issues'.   Sit back and watch the red whales throw tons of cash at you to keep the orgy funded.

    Then after a griefer leaves the game you let him know he never actually managed to kill a real player - they were all AI bots, just to crush the tiny, shrivel, worm that is his soul.


    This would be an epic ruse.

    I mean, the game would instantly die after that point, once the cat was out of the bag, and gamers would find out who the Developer was that set that up, and never play another game with their name on it

    But this would be epic to do
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • XiaokiXiaoki Member EpicPosts: 4,036
    Ungood said:
    The thing is, it's much harder to get that steady stream of new players as time moves on, and even harder if your game has a box price, and stupid hard if you have a sub on top of that.

    This is really the case if you do not have a strong core of loyal costumers to both entice more people to join, and be there for them to interact with, your game is at best, going to limp along, it's not going to thrive

    You will eventually lose the loyal customers over time, and if you are unable to attract new customers then your MMO will stagnate and slowly die.

    Seen it happen so many times over the past 15 years.

    Look at EQ2, at first they changed to complete with WoW and when it became evident that was a lost cause they stopped changing to retain their current players. And look where that got EQ2.

    And when the developers ask their loyal fans what they can do to improve they are told to change nothing and keep doing the same thing.

    On the other hand, WoW changed and adapted to the shifting market which attracted a steady stream of new players and WoW has been able to remain relevant for nearly 20 years.

    Trying to rely on your loyal fans has been the death of many video games. They simply can not stay with you forever and they are the least reliable for feedback.
    Kyleran
  • UngoodUngood Member LegendaryPosts: 7,534
    Xiaoki said:
    Ungood said:
    The thing is, it's much harder to get that steady stream of new players as time moves on, and even harder if your game has a box price, and stupid hard if you have a sub on top of that.

    This is really the case if you do not have a strong core of loyal costumers to both entice more people to join, and be there for them to interact with, your game is at best, going to limp along, it's not going to thrive

    You will eventually lose the loyal customers over time, and if you are unable to attract new customers then your MMO will stagnate and slowly die.

    Seen it happen so many times over the past 15 years.

    Look at EQ2, at first they changed to complete with WoW and when it became evident that was a lost cause they stopped changing to retain their current players. And look where that got EQ2.

    And when the developers ask their loyal fans what they can do to improve they are told to change nothing and keep doing the same thing.

    On the other hand, WoW changed and adapted to the shifting market which attracted a steady stream of new players and WoW has been able to remain relevant for nearly 20 years.

    Trying to rely on your loyal fans has been the death of many video games. They simply can not stay with you forever and they are the least reliable for feedback.
    EQ2 is a great example of targeting a demographic, and not losing sight of that target.

    EQ2 was a cautionary tale of pretty much FO&FA, trying to change direction to compete against WoW, didn't really know who or what they were trying to hold on to originally, losing sight of who and what their core should be, and by the time they tried to find that core to hold on to it was TL/TL.

    Same with a lot of games, watch them, they try to shift gears, think "Oh maybe we can get that other demographic as well" and.. Woopies we took that ram rod right up the old poop hole!

    GW2 did the same damn thing and almost sank their shit as well.
    Egotism is the anesthetic that dullens the pain of stupidity, this is why when I try to beat my head against the stupidity of other people, I only hurt myself.

  • kitaradkitarad Member LegendaryPosts: 8,164
    Sorry but what does FO&FA mean?
    SovrathBrainy

  • KnightFalzKnightFalz Member EpicPosts: 4,522
    Ungood said:
    Wargfoot said:
    Ungood said:

    As the saying Goes, there is a sucker born every minuet, the People investing Millions Dollars and years of their life to make a MMO, should take a lot more effort to ensure they are not one of them
    They could start by asking players "How many games have you played?".

    If the player responds with every game developed since 1995 then for the love of all that is decent, don't listen to a damn thing they have to say!

    A person who has played all those games will only have 3 weeks to enjoy your title, crap all over it, and move on.  Find players who stick with a game for the long term and make those people happy.

    Why should they care? A steady stream of newcomers can be as profitable as a committed static audience, likely even more so in games that rely mostly on buy to play for their profitability.

    The advice provided by players of earliest of MMORPGs is suited to only those games that wish to mimic the business model at that time, purchase of the game and expansions with a mandatory, ongoing subscription. In such conditions the only path to profit is a focus on game improvement.

    Good luck with that these days. Only two MMORPGs can so demand, and even they supplement their revenue through cash shops.
    The thing is, it's much harder to get that steady stream of new players as time moves on, and even harder if your game has a box price, and stupid hard if you have a sub on top of that.

    This is really the case if you do not have a strong core of loyal costumers to both entice more people to join, and be there for them to interact with, your game is at best, going to limp along, it's not going to thrive

    See, It's a super cool effect for MMO's where the more people you have, the more people you attract, and the more people you keep, this is why games talk about their population so much, and why it is such an important aspect for both gamers and developers, no one wants to log into a game that feels like a wasteland with no one around them

    This is also why it is such a panic mode when a game starts to lose players, especially if it starts to lose it's core player base. While they may not lose money from player loss, because the players that are leaving are not spenders, and those that stay are whales, so it's not a matter of money for F2P games, but a matter of that core population being content for other payers to interact with.

    In PvE MMO's that population is a super powerful sell point for them get players to spend money, this is also why GW2 brags like mother fuckers about how friendly their players are. See, when a new player joins the game, they log in and there are people around them, for them to interact, chat, ask for help, do quests and events with, and because those (friendly) players are there, they are engaging, suddenly the new player now fucking loves this game and wants to spend all their money on it

    The mechanics alone are not what is going to hold all the social players, or get them to dump money into the game, they can find that same shit in a dozen other MMO's, so whatever your selling, is not special.

    It's your player base that will make or break your game overall.

    This is why games have gone Free to Play, they would rather lose whatever money they could make on a box sale and a sub, just to have those players give their game a sense of population, activity, and a social community.

    Assuming those free players are not complete raving assholes, of course.

    Now when F2P first started it showed to be somewhat more profitable then Subs, but that quickly changed, as the mindset of the players changed to adapt to the F2P gaming market.

    Just to understand how that played out, DDO when it launched it's ground breaking F2P system, bucking the trend that MMO's could not go F2P, ended up making around 17 dollars a player back in 2012.

    That burst of spending died pretty quick however as the novelty wore off, and of course the rise and fall of the P2W epidemic that plagued a lot of MMO's and Online Games.

    Now days GW2 has around twice the population that EQ1 had at it's peak, however EQ1 through subs and box sales, made over twice what GW2 makes annually

    Item shops are not this gold bullet that some people think they are, they are a means of survival in a changing landscape

    But, all games need that population to ensure their games do not feel dead, and games that feel dead, don't thrive.

    MMORPGs now default to having a f2p option because the majority of their competitors do. It is a trend very difficult to buck for those new to the party and even for those established to maintain. As I mentioned previously, only two can demand a purchase   with ongoing subscription model and both supplement that with a cash shop. One of them provides an extensive trial period with minor inconvenience that can be played through before committing to that payment model.

    Item shops aren't a golden bullet but for some games they make up a significant portion of the revenue earning ammunition. For a few games they make up the entirety of it and such is where these shops tend to be the most egregious.
    Scot
Sign In or Register to comment.