Why does the world assume that console players are cheap and poor? Apparently, they had enough money to upgrade to a new system right after it came out.
I think its about time we stop assuming the console players all live in their grandmother's basement.
Console players have jobs, too. Its not just a PC gamer world out there.
If you are so certain that B2P would have been perfect, perhaps you could give us a rough costing outlay of how this would cover the costs of server maintenance, customer services, content development, employee wages, tax, recovering investment from developing game + reasonable interest etc, for the next 2 or 3+ years, assuming of course, your intention is for the game to be running for more than 1 year.
i always find it amusing that people make such outlandish claims and complaints about a games financial model without considering what those financial models actually represent.
Reasonable question. The assumption that these costs can be covered by a sub I don't find reasonable however.
B2P: box price should seek to recover all development costs. If $100 will recover the costs based on X sales don't charge $60 and assume that people will stay subbed for 3 months to make up the difference. Do this and the sub isn't covering any on-going or future costs. The game has a core element as well.
Charge for new content. Cost to cover cost of developing it. Offer the option to set up an account so that people who want to get the new content as soon as it releases get it. Sounds like a sub but crucially people a) don't have to buy it b) people who play 1 month, take 6 months off, come back for 1 month don't get the new content for "nothing2.
Server costs have been falling since the release of AC - which is why NCSoft was able to coin the term pay once play forever. There is a cost however and Zenimax could choose to cap their future costs by including 6, 12 or 24 months in the box and leaving themselves the option of charging $10 for another 6 months - or whatever. And just like Tabula Rosa didn't mean GW1 had failed Wildstar doesn't mean that GW2 has failed (it hasn't based on NCSoft's accounts).
Customer service. Options. None expected - the game would be B2P afterall. Calls to cost X. Charge a 3 month fee - or whatever. Include as a free service in a premium package - sign up for the next 4 content drops and get free customer service - basically what Battefield has been doing etc.
When mmos launched there was a box price, a network charge and a cost for new content. I strongly believe it would be better if TESO went back to basics and brought this type of model back. The list of sub based games that have failed is huge.
Originally posted by ZombieKen If their subscription system can hold a million players for four months, that's $60,000,000.
I do agree that B2P vs subscription is inviting. I think TSW is fairly solid evidence for this.
However, a cool 60 million could make Zenimax very happy if they can pull it off.
I agree with this. My crystal ball sees ESO cashing in on as many subs as they can and then going down the TSW path and going buy to play once they start bleeding subs. Probably part of the reason they went with a cash shop for cosmetic stuff instead of a web based method.
Yep. They will probably go this route. The early adopters will foot the bill, then when things start thinning out, the changeover to BTP will get instituted. Given that most ES fans haven't been playing for the RvR, there's likely to be a significant fallout as they realize this isn't Skyrim Plus. The bean counters have probably already got the whole superstructure set up, including a cash shop in place that can be switched into heavy mode fairly easily.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I am big against cosmetic shops for real money, everything characters wear and own should have been attained in the game..
there was also the option of just having dlc packs available every month for like €15 but then Sony and Micro$oft would eat a large chunck of money... So that isnt an option either...
Sub fees is the only succesfull way to go if you want to keep the game clean and fair... Personally i would love to see box prices dissapear and subs becomming the only costs for MMO players... Wanna play a game start pushing €15 a month as long as you want to play.. Stop playing and the subs ription stops..... And all content added willl be free..
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I stand firmly in my belief that I really don't care what their revenue model is. People just like to go on and on about what the publisher's success definition is.
I am not a publisher, I am a player. Success to me means that I get to play the game and enjoy it. I have yet to play any game where my desire to keep playing has exceeded their ability to stay open for business. I don't worry about it.
I'll let you know if this game is a success from my gamer's point of view in a few months.
But if you enjoy speculating about corporate business models, by all means, carry on... just wish there was sub-forum here for that.
"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
no question, random people sitting at their desks know a lot more about game company financial results than the people running the company. I bet you would be awesome at calling plays for a football team while sitting on your couch watching the game.
"I firmly stand by my opinion"... I literally LOL's at the word 'firmly', like it wasn't enough to post your opinion or tell us that you still hold but, but that you still 'firmly' hold it. Wow that means so very, very much!
Good to know I wasn't the only one laughing at this title.
And I firmly stand that any game at all with a cash shop built into the game is bad, period. Real money shopping does not belong in this genre. Leave it for the gambling sites.
With the way they are talking about content/meaningful updates once a month, I don't see how anyone can possibly say that any other payment model is better than a sub.
I guess mmo players are mostly unemployed from all the OMG $15 a month will break me threads.
With the way they are talking about content/meaningful updates once a month, I don't see how anyone can possibly say that any other payment model is better than a sub.
I guess mmo players are mostly unemployed from all the OMG $15 a month will break me threads.
They spent all their money on a supped up rig so they can play Minecraft and bitch on the forums in 1080p.
With the way they are talking about content/meaningful updates once a month, I don't see how anyone can possibly say that any other payment model is better than a sub.
I guess mmo players are mostly unemployed from all the OMG $15 a month will break me threads.
Like we haven't heard that before. And we all know how that really turns out lame crap ware because they have lost so many customers in the first couple of months that they can't support their promises of cool ongoing content releases. SWTOR? Even GW2? TSW? I would much rather see B2P with worthy expansions to buy every six months.
With the way they are talking about content/meaningful updates once a month, I don't see how anyone can possibly say that any other payment model is better than a sub.
I guess mmo players are mostly unemployed from all the OMG $15 a month will break me threads.
The army of failed sub games is legion.
Much better to charge for new content; as it releases and at a cost appropriate to the size of the package. And Zenimax can offer premium membership as well like EA do. Maybe $180 a year @ $15 a month for which they will get X content drops. Or whatever.
You must be one of those subscription freeloaders that can only afford $15 a month - for which you expect endless content and extensive customer service to boot. Who will stop subscribing after a month or two but expect all the new content to be available when they come back - for free. That is what most subscribers expect. Freeloaders!
Elder Scrolls games are more popular on Consoles than it is on PC. And Console games follow a B2P model for ages now, and is something Console gamers are use to.
TESO being a Console game as well, would have worked perfectly with this model.
Also I want to note, that I also believe TESO has some poor game designs built into its structure, that will cause its own doom.
But what I learned from GW2, people are far more forgiving of these game design flaws from the first impression of release.
Games that switch to a B2P mode after release, dont get the same kind of reaction from public because its assumed that the game has flaws already to be forced to go B2p/F2P to begin with.
Gives a bad impression.
Start B2P and this game would do much better than its currently heading for.
Sorry to say it but i dont think people really care, you can either choose to pay or you dont.
Why does the world assume that console players are cheap and poor? Apparently, they had enough money to upgrade to a new system right after it came out.
I think its about time we stop assuming the console players all live in their grandmother's basement.
Console players have jobs, too. Its not just a PC gamer world out there.
completely agree with this one. Console players have money, and mmo companies should give their best to take that money away. so id like them to add a monthly sub on consoles (not internet, just plain monthly sub for owning a console).
and from there it could only get better, we could even demand for additional monthly subs on using net + another sub for our mmo(s) of choice.
i want, no scrap that, i demand game publishers to charge us much more than they currently are, because we have money and id be much happier man if mmo companies would have that money instead.
its a revolution!!! we want to pay more, and i wont stop before we do!
Originally posted by JimyHumuHumu ...so id like them to add a monthly sub on consoles (not internet, just plain monthly sub for owning a console).
Originally posted by MMOExposed
...And Console games follow a B2P model for ages now, and is something Console gamers are use to.
I'm guessing neither of you ever had to buy an xbox live card/alternative in order to play games online via their console then? It's more likely that a truly B2P model that charges neither the playstation or xbox network to connect (nor additional payments via season passes, monthly map/content packs, etc.) would actually be the concept they aren't used to =/
Elder Scrolls games are more popular on Consoles than it is on PC. And Console games follow a B2P model for ages now, and is something Console gamers are use to.
Elder Scrolls are MUCH more popular and long lasting on PC not console. PC gamers have all the mods which has kept the series alive and well FAR past the time when the average Xboxer sold their copy of Oblivion or Skyrim.
in terms of the B2P model - I'm quite sure their plan will be to make as much from box sales and subs for the first 6-12 months then go F2P with item shop like Lord of the Rings. This way they make back their money in the quickest time possible and once the population starts dipping, boost it back up with the F2P model.
If you are so certain that B2P would have been perfect, perhaps you could give us a rough costing outlay of how this would cover the costs of server maintenance, customer services, content development, employee wages, tax, recovering investment from developing game + reasonable interest etc, for the next 2 or 3+ years, assuming of course, your intention is for the game to be running for more than 1 year.
i always find it amusing that people make such outlandish claims and complaints about a games financial model without considering what those financial models actually represent.
Reasonable question. The assumption that these costs can be covered by a sub I don't find reasonable however.
B2P: box price should seek to recover all development costs. If $100 will recover the costs based on X sales don't charge $60 and assume that people will stay subbed for 3 months to make up the difference. Do this and the sub isn't covering any on-going or future costs. The game has a core element as well.
Charge for new content. Cost to cover cost of developing it. Offer the option to set up an account so that people who want to get the new content as soon as it releases get it. Sounds like a sub but crucially people a) don't have to buy it b) people who play 1 month, take 6 months off, come back for 1 month don't get the new content for "nothing2.
Server costs have been falling since the release of AC - which is why NCSoft was able to coin the term pay once play forever. There is a cost however and Zenimax could choose to cap their future costs by including 6, 12 or 24 months in the box and leaving themselves the option of charging $10 for another 6 months - or whatever. And just like Tabula Rosa didn't mean GW1 had failed Wildstar doesn't mean that GW2 has failed (it hasn't based on NCSoft's accounts).
Customer service. Options. None expected - the game would be B2P afterall. Calls to cost X. Charge a 3 month fee - or whatever. Include as a free service in a premium package - sign up for the next 4 content drops and get free customer service - basically what Battefield has been doing etc.
When mmos launched there was a box price, a network charge and a cost for new content. I strongly believe it would be better if TESO went back to basics and brought this type of model back. The list of sub based games that have failed is huge.
Sub games fail because tiny wow clones have been all that have been released for years. Why would anyone pay for a game that you could hit max level within a month, in a tiny zoned off world, just to do five dungeons on repeat for a year while waiting for something new?
The problem has nothing to do with the payment model and everything to do with a flawed game.
Why does the world assume that console players are cheap and poor? Apparently, they had enough money to upgrade to a new system right after it came out.
I think its about time we stop assuming the console players all live in their grandmother's basement.
Console players have jobs, too. Its not just a PC gamer world out there.
The truth is lots of MMORPG are being dumbed down to console playabilty and most of the time it's the PC gamer who take the shaft.This has nothing to do with console player being cheap or poor.
Now concerning ESO,the game doesn't worth paying a sub because it's not a real MMORPG.I'm ready to pay a sub if a company gives me a real MMORPG .There are a lot of indie company making true MMORPG out there and I will buy and subscribe to the one I like and ESO is just a console port and Zenimax wants to cash the maximum on release.
In the land of Predators,the lion does not fear the jackals...
That comes down to just one thing.... do they have the content too keep people paying? Not many new MMOs do and when they dont. Customers ask why they are paying and leave. Then question if paying for another mother later to just check things out is a risk many wont take. ESO is betting it all on black. Time to see if they have the number.
Originally posted by Lord.Bachus I am big against cosmetic shops for real money, everything characters wear and own should have been attained in the game.. there was also the option of just having dlc packs available every month for like 15 but then Sony and Micro$oft would eat a large chunck of money... So that isnt an option either... Sub fees is the only succesfull way to go if you want to keep the game clean and fair... Personally i would love to see box prices dissapear and subs becomming the only costs for MMO players... Wanna play a game start pushing 15 a month as long as you want to play.. Stop playing and the subs ription stops..... And all content added willl be free..
There is a problem with this logic though. Cash shop and subs are not mutually exclusive. You will see a cash shop in almost every future game regardless of whether it has subs or not. People seem to want to lump these into F2P but they are a completely separate thing that is finding its way into all games regardless of the payment model.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle That comes down to just one thing.... do they have the content too keep people paying? Not many new MMOs do.
That might be an almost impossible task these days, and one of the reasons this genre is dying.
People, for whatever reason, want to burn through content as quickly as possible. Few people want to enjoy the journey, they just want to get to the destination. That, in and of itself, pretty much makes it impossible for new MMORPGs to deliver anything more than 2-4 weeks of content for a lot of players.
The worst part of that, is the only way to slow them down is to make the game progression slower, then people whine about how slow the game is to play or how grindy it is.
I am not sure there is a solution to this problem in the genre, as it is societal more than genre specific, at least that is my take on it.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle That comes down to just one thing.... do they have the content too keep people paying? Not many new MMOs do.
That might be an almost impossible task these days, and one of the reasons this genre is dying.
People, for whatever reason, want to burn through content as quickly as possible. Few people want to enjoy the journey, they just want to get to the destination. That, in and of itself, pretty much makes it impossible for new MMORPGs to deliver anything more than 2-4 weeks of content for a lot of players.
The worst part of that, is the only way to slow them down is to make the game progression slower, then people whine about how slow the game is to play or how grindy it is.
I am not sure there is a solution to this problem in the genre, as it is societal more than genre specific, at least that is my take on it.
You have the failed idea that leveling is content that matters. What a MMO needs to do is have end game content with many gear tiers to work towards. This game wont have "Raids" so right there is a worry. For casual player you need to make sure all dungeons have a hard mode set up before launch. There has to be enough end game content that by the time you have gone over it all going back to the start is worth doing. Guilds should be able to line up weeks worth of evens without the need to recycle the same content. Most hardcore guilds have en event 3-7 times a week and developers know this so why they dont plan for it I dont know.
Originally posted by Nanfoodle That comes down to just one thing.... do they have the content too keep people paying? Not many new MMOs do.
That might be an almost impossible task these days, and one of the reasons this genre is dying.
People, for whatever reason, want to burn through content as quickly as possible. Few people want to enjoy the journey, they just want to get to the destination. That, in and of itself, pretty much makes it impossible for new MMORPGs to deliver anything more than 2-4 weeks of content for a lot of players.
The worst part of that, is the only way to slow them down is to make the game progression slower, then people whine about how slow the game is to play or how grindy it is.
I am not sure there is a solution to this problem in the genre, as it is societal more than genre specific, at least that is my take on it.
You have the failed idea that leveling is content that matters. What a MMO needs to do is have end game content with many gear tiers to work towards. This game wont have "Raids" so right there is a worry. For casual player you need to make sure all dungeons have a hard mode set up before launch. There has to be enough end game content that by the time you have gone over it all going back to the start is worth doing. Guilds should be able to line up weeks worth of evens without the need to recycle the same content. Most hardcore guilds have en event 3-7 times a week and developers know this so why they dont plan for it I dont know.
So that's the secret to success? Not the visible and noticeable character growth that happens as you level but the tiny incremental changes you get while repeating content over and over again -- after the artificial weekly locks expire that is -- to fine tune the best in slot gear?
In other words, WOW forever ... sometimes with a new skin and title but basically the WOW formula repeated over and over?
I think what you mean when you say "What an MMO needs..." is "What I think I like, although I'm not really sure since I'm beginning to get bored with FF XIV already."
"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
I cant agree more with the title of this thread. The only way this game has any chance of success (read sustained player base, not financial goals), is with a B2P pay plan.
The game doesnt offer the content required to sustain a subscription. At end game (where retention comes into play) the only content is world PVP (Cyrodill). The rest of the game consists of solo PVE gameplay in each of the 3 factions and small group play in dungeons. To support a subscription they need to add in large group PVE, and smaller group PVP (arenas, battlegrounds, ect.). There needs to be a variety of player content or the game grows stale very quickly.
If you compare this to game with similar content offerings, its just like GW2. Solo PVE, and world PVP. To be a success, it shouldnt cost more. If you really want to gauge the game, just compare multiple games. Take a look at SWTOR, TSW, or any other recently released MMO. The game is made or broken on content (almost all on end game content). You have to have something for players to do at level cap, or they will create a mass exodus and never look back. And the promise of future content (FF14) isnt enough to retain. Launch an incomplete game, and once players reach the wall, they will still leave. Not sit around waiting for the content that should have been in from the start.
Add to that, the franchise was born on single player games. All of which just cost a box price, with an enormous amount of content being added with mods from players. The TES playerbase is used to this kind of pricing. Pay for the box, and recieve a constantly updated game, with small charges sometimes for DLC. Sounds an awful lot like B2P with cash shop (microtransactions) not subscription.
I really want the game to be successful. They are trying to bring us the game many players like me have been asking for decades, not just since Skyrim. I really want to love the game, but I find I just cant. It just doesnt offer "enough" to keep players around for the price they are asking. The content just isnt there.
Comments
Why does the world assume that console players are cheap and poor? Apparently, they had enough money to upgrade to a new system right after it came out.
I think its about time we stop assuming the console players all live in their grandmother's basement.
Console players have jobs, too. Its not just a PC gamer world out there.
@PigglesworthTWR on Twitter
Pigglesworth @ EQNForum.com, MMORPG.com, EQNextfans.com, ProjectNorrath.com, & EQNFanSite.com
Malcontent @ EQNexus.com & EQHammer.com
Reasonable question. The assumption that these costs can be covered by a sub I don't find reasonable however.
B2P: box price should seek to recover all development costs. If $100 will recover the costs based on X sales don't charge $60 and assume that people will stay subbed for 3 months to make up the difference. Do this and the sub isn't covering any on-going or future costs. The game has a core element as well.
Charge for new content. Cost to cover cost of developing it. Offer the option to set up an account so that people who want to get the new content as soon as it releases get it. Sounds like a sub but crucially people a) don't have to buy it b) people who play 1 month, take 6 months off, come back for 1 month don't get the new content for "nothing2.
Server costs have been falling since the release of AC - which is why NCSoft was able to coin the term pay once play forever. There is a cost however and Zenimax could choose to cap their future costs by including 6, 12 or 24 months in the box and leaving themselves the option of charging $10 for another 6 months - or whatever. And just like Tabula Rosa didn't mean GW1 had failed Wildstar doesn't mean that GW2 has failed (it hasn't based on NCSoft's accounts).
Customer service. Options. None expected - the game would be B2P afterall. Calls to cost X. Charge a 3 month fee - or whatever. Include as a free service in a premium package - sign up for the next 4 content drops and get free customer service - basically what Battefield has been doing etc.
When mmos launched there was a box price, a network charge and a cost for new content. I strongly believe it would be better if TESO went back to basics and brought this type of model back. The list of sub based games that have failed is huge.
Yep. They will probably go this route. The early adopters will foot the bill, then when things start thinning out, the changeover to BTP will get instituted. Given that most ES fans haven't been playing for the RvR, there's likely to be a significant fallout as they realize this isn't Skyrim Plus. The bean counters have probably already got the whole superstructure set up, including a cash shop in place that can be switched into heavy mode fairly easily.
If you are holding out for the perfect game, the only game you play will be the waiting one.
I am big against cosmetic shops for real money, everything characters wear and own should have been attained in the game..
there was also the option of just having dlc packs available every month for like €15 but then Sony and Micro$oft would eat a large chunck of money... So that isnt an option either...
Sub fees is the only succesfull way to go if you want to keep the game clean and fair... Personally i would love to see box prices dissapear and subs becomming the only costs for MMO players... Wanna play a game start pushing €15 a month as long as you want to play.. Stop playing and the subs ription stops..... And all content added willl be free..
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I stand firmly in my belief that I really don't care what their revenue model is. People just like to go on and on about what the publisher's success definition is.
I am not a publisher, I am a player. Success to me means that I get to play the game and enjoy it. I have yet to play any game where my desire to keep playing has exceeded their ability to stay open for business. I don't worry about it.
I'll let you know if this game is a success from my gamer's point of view in a few months.
But if you enjoy speculating about corporate business models, by all means, carry on... just wish there was sub-forum here for that.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Good to know I wasn't the only one laughing at this title.
With the way they are talking about content/meaningful updates once a month, I don't see how anyone can possibly say that any other payment model is better than a sub.
I guess mmo players are mostly unemployed from all the OMG $15 a month will break me threads.
They spent all their money on a supped up rig so they can play Minecraft and bitch on the forums in 1080p.
Like we haven't heard that before. And we all know how that really turns out lame crap ware because they have lost so many customers in the first couple of months that they can't support their promises of cool ongoing content releases. SWTOR? Even GW2? TSW? I would much rather see B2P with worthy expansions to buy every six months.
The army of failed sub games is legion.
Much better to charge for new content; as it releases and at a cost appropriate to the size of the package. And Zenimax can offer premium membership as well like EA do. Maybe $180 a year @ $15 a month for which they will get X content drops. Or whatever.
You must be one of those subscription freeloaders that can only afford $15 a month - for which you expect endless content and extensive customer service to boot. Who will stop subscribing after a month or two but expect all the new content to be available when they come back - for free. That is what most subscribers expect. Freeloaders!
Sorry to say it but i dont think people really care, you can either choose to pay or you dont.
completely agree with this one. Console players have money, and mmo companies should give their best to take that money away. so id like them to add a monthly sub on consoles (not internet, just plain monthly sub for owning a console).
and from there it could only get better, we could even demand for additional monthly subs on using net + another sub for our mmo(s) of choice.
i want, no scrap that, i demand game publishers to charge us much more than they currently are, because we have money and id be much happier man if mmo companies would have that money instead.
its a revolution!!! we want to pay more, and i wont stop before we do!
I'm guessing neither of you ever had to buy an xbox live card/alternative in order to play games online via their console then? It's more likely that a truly B2P model that charges neither the playstation or xbox network to connect (nor additional payments via season passes, monthly map/content packs, etc.) would actually be the concept they aren't used to =/
Elder Scrolls are MUCH more popular and long lasting on PC not console. PC gamers have all the mods which has kept the series alive and well FAR past the time when the average Xboxer sold their copy of Oblivion or Skyrim.
in terms of the B2P model - I'm quite sure their plan will be to make as much from box sales and subs for the first 6-12 months then go F2P with item shop like Lord of the Rings. This way they make back their money in the quickest time possible and once the population starts dipping, boost it back up with the F2P model.
TSW had 8 miniscule sized zones. The only evidence it could show is that if you release a tiny game with no content, people won't pay a subscription.
Sub games fail because tiny wow clones have been all that have been released for years. Why would anyone pay for a game that you could hit max level within a month, in a tiny zoned off world, just to do five dungeons on repeat for a year while waiting for something new?
The problem has nothing to do with the payment model and everything to do with a flawed game.
The truth is lots of MMORPG are being dumbed down to console playabilty and most of the time it's the PC gamer who take the shaft.This has nothing to do with console player being cheap or poor.
Now concerning ESO,the game doesn't worth paying a sub because it's not a real MMORPG.I'm ready to pay a sub if a company gives me a real MMORPG .There are a lot of indie company making true MMORPG out there and I will buy and subscribe to the one I like and ESO is just a console port and Zenimax wants to cash the maximum on release.
In the land of Predators,the lion does not fear the jackals...
There is a problem with this logic though. Cash shop and subs are not mutually exclusive. You will see a cash shop in almost every future game regardless of whether it has subs or not. People seem to want to lump these into F2P but they are a completely separate thing that is finding its way into all games regardless of the payment model.
That might be an almost impossible task these days, and one of the reasons this genre is dying.
People, for whatever reason, want to burn through content as quickly as possible. Few people want to enjoy the journey, they just want to get to the destination. That, in and of itself, pretty much makes it impossible for new MMORPGs to deliver anything more than 2-4 weeks of content for a lot of players.
The worst part of that, is the only way to slow them down is to make the game progression slower, then people whine about how slow the game is to play or how grindy it is.
I am not sure there is a solution to this problem in the genre, as it is societal more than genre specific, at least that is my take on it.
You have the failed idea that leveling is content that matters. What a MMO needs to do is have end game content with many gear tiers to work towards. This game wont have "Raids" so right there is a worry. For casual player you need to make sure all dungeons have a hard mode set up before launch. There has to be enough end game content that by the time you have gone over it all going back to the start is worth doing. Guilds should be able to line up weeks worth of evens without the need to recycle the same content. Most hardcore guilds have en event 3-7 times a week and developers know this so why they dont plan for it I dont know.
So that's the secret to success? Not the visible and noticeable character growth that happens as you level but the tiny incremental changes you get while repeating content over and over again -- after the artificial weekly locks expire that is -- to fine tune the best in slot gear?
In other words, WOW forever ... sometimes with a new skin and title but basically the WOW formula repeated over and over?
I think what you mean when you say "What an MMO needs..." is "What I think I like, although I'm not really sure since I'm beginning to get bored with FF XIV already."
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I cant agree more with the title of this thread. The only way this game has any chance of success (read sustained player base, not financial goals), is with a B2P pay plan.
The game doesnt offer the content required to sustain a subscription. At end game (where retention comes into play) the only content is world PVP (Cyrodill). The rest of the game consists of solo PVE gameplay in each of the 3 factions and small group play in dungeons. To support a subscription they need to add in large group PVE, and smaller group PVP (arenas, battlegrounds, ect.). There needs to be a variety of player content or the game grows stale very quickly.
If you compare this to game with similar content offerings, its just like GW2. Solo PVE, and world PVP. To be a success, it shouldnt cost more. If you really want to gauge the game, just compare multiple games. Take a look at SWTOR, TSW, or any other recently released MMO. The game is made or broken on content (almost all on end game content). You have to have something for players to do at level cap, or they will create a mass exodus and never look back. And the promise of future content (FF14) isnt enough to retain. Launch an incomplete game, and once players reach the wall, they will still leave. Not sit around waiting for the content that should have been in from the start.
Add to that, the franchise was born on single player games. All of which just cost a box price, with an enormous amount of content being added with mods from players. The TES playerbase is used to this kind of pricing. Pay for the box, and recieve a constantly updated game, with small charges sometimes for DLC. Sounds an awful lot like B2P with cash shop (microtransactions) not subscription.
I really want the game to be successful. They are trying to bring us the game many players like me have been asking for decades, not just since Skyrim. I really want to love the game, but I find I just cant. It just doesnt offer "enough" to keep players around for the price they are asking. The content just isnt there.