Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Devs should ignore P2W complaints from players?
nariusseldon
Member EpicPosts: 27,775
http://www.slideshare.net/bcousins/paying-to-win
Look at slide 71. They make the game more P2W (selling weapons) ... and I quote
"... which caused a huge uproar online ...."
"... but which didn't actually correspond with a declining usebase ..."
So it seems that while there is a very vocal minority crying blooded murder for anything P2W ... most players don't care ... or at least don't care enough to quit. In fact, if you look at slide 67, their churn does not change much (or even decrease a bit) after the game is MORE p2w.
It looks like P2W is pretty acceptable to the core audience.
Comments
This is old news...
It's too mature topic/information for these boards anyway.
I had fun once, it was terrible.
wait .. their data specifically shows that p2w is NOT decreasing their userbase. So what is this "frowned upon" business? A few angry forum post does not translate to mass exodus.
In fact, their message is that despite what some may be angry, p2w is helping to maximize their income.
i never said anything about mass exodus.. all i said is it's not helping to get people to stick around if they offer it. and no i did not check your link as i assume it's pretty biased so i just stick to the discussion.
I had fun once, it was terrible.
Well, if you don't look at the data, there is no discussion.
And you are wrong. The data explicitly shows that people are sticking around even they put more P2W into the game.
That is the whole point. Your opinion that it will reduce user-base is wrong, and not supported by facts.
That is the point.
Furthermore, players are obviously NOT voting with their wallet in this case. The only conclusion is that either they accept P2W, or they don't care enough to switch.
Either way ... while a small fraction of people are opposed to p2w, they are not that important to the market.
Devs should ignore P2W complaints from players?
Maybe not,i dont know have you heard about Diablo 3 but hey used to have p2w cash shop and peeps complained ,devs removed it and people started to play.
So maybe players should ignore p2w from devs.
seems like a workin formula.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Ok so i checked your link and it's pretty much a bunch of BS.
"oh teh noes a fancy youtube video must be completely true!"
I had fun once, it was terrible.
hmm .. D3 did NOT have a p2w cash shop. They have a real money AH which allows PLAYERS to buy stuff from one another with real money. That is not that same as Blizz selling virtual swords to players.
And clearly in this case (of the link), going p2w works wonder for them.
continue to put your head in the sand? Guess that is what you choose to do.
And what youtube video? I am talking about the data on the slides.
No, it's like they said ignore complaints from forum posters and look at the total player base.
Also from the video: "dont give players the feeling theyre loosing because of bought items". To much P2W could backfire.
It all depends on the implementation. In rpgs collecting gear is a big part of the game, selling skills would work better imo.
Yes, that is exactly what they have done, and in this case, it looks like the total player base has no problem with p2w.
i am sure there are a thousand ways to cut & dice p2w (selling skills as you have suggested). But the point is that their total player base don't seem to have a problem with p2w.
Now i am sure that is not new news since p2w is so prevalent, that it must work. But some here think that ALL players deplore p2w and will jump ship with the smallest hint of it ... and it is clearly not true here.
There are a lot of confounding variables in any study like this that means one should be hesitant about drawing definitive conclusions.
1) The proper comparison is not what happened after adding pay to win stuff versus what happened before it. Rather, it is what happened after adding pay to win stuff versus what would have happened during the same time if the pay to win stuff hadn't been added. The latter is unknowable.
2) There's an enormous difference between a game that started out with a pay to win item mall and adds more such pay to win stuff to it versus a subscription game that developers promised would never be pay to win that subsequently adds pay to win stuff.
3) Not all "pay to win" is equivalent. I have no problem with people who pay $15/month having huge advantages over people who pay nothing. But when someone who pays $50/month is at a huge disadvantage as compared to someone who pays $100/month, who is in, in turn, at a huge disadvantage to someone who pays $200/month, that's a problem. Both might be called "pay to win", but they're very different; the latter is sometimes a thin veneer over a contest of whoever pays the most, wins.
4) The proper metric is not just how many players you have, but how much revenue you get from them. Angering a bunch of players who were never going to pay you anything anyway isn't the same sort of problem as driving away paying players. If you lose half of your players but double your revenue, that's a clear win.
5) Reputation matters, but is hard to measure. If you genuinely increase your revenue by going pay to win on one particular game, but it tars the company's reputation so that you sell less on future games, that can easily be a net loss for you. If EA is behind a game, I'm immediately less interested in it than I would be in an otherwise seemingly identical game run by Blizzard, SOE, NCSoft, Square-Enix, or a number of other companies.
Topics like these confuse me very much for many reasons.
#1 You can't control what a developer does
#2 It's much more disgusting that people play P2W games than it is for people to make them. It shows a kind of cultural disease.
#3 What do you mean by "winning?" Are we talking about PVP or getting to end game the fastest?
#4 If it's PVP then that's fucked up. If it's getting to end game the fastest than it's a flawed game (like most MMOs) anyways.
#5 If you're paying to win then it must not be a game that's fun to play on its own.
All good points ...
and certainly this is not a properly controlled study .. but at the same time, it is the best data there is .. there is NO proper study.
And certainly this statement ... "after they put in more p2w, the user-base did not decrease" is accurate. You can draw whatever conclusion from it as you want .. but certainly "p2w will lead to player leaving and less money" is not supported by this data.
#1 .. no you cannot .. but at the same time, you can discuss what is good for them (in this case, make lots of money) and how. We are on a forum. Just talk for fun.
#2 sure you can be disgusted by them, and i certainly don't buy virtual swords. But that is not the point. The point is that the audience in this game are ok with it .. and that is interesting information. It disputes the notion that most players hate p2w and will leave if devs use more p2w.
#3 in this case, it is very clear .. p2w means selling weapons that are more effective. It is in the presentation.
#4 i think it is pvp (the game is battlefield heroes). Well, "fucked up" is a matter of perspective. I am sure the devs are very happy that they are making more money, and more players are buying the virtual weapons. I am sure none of them think it is "fucked up".
Seems like you have not heard about D3 then or online cash shops.
anyways:
you can buy it from here but i warn you,they DONT have p2w cash shop anymore so it might not be game for you.
So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
**On the radar: http://www.cyberpunk.net/ **
Why should I care if someone pays for an advantage if it doesn't affect me?
In all honesty they probably should just ignore the P2W complaints.
Most people don't really care. They don't care if they are being taken advantage of. They don't care that they are being sold a game piece meal. They don't care that P2W defeats the purpose of playing games. They are just interested in having their little fun and moving on.
People love thinking they are getting deals on things, or that they have a choice in what content they want to buy. People are more comfortable spending money in a cash shop than paying a flat sub fee every month. The insanity that is humanity will keep chugging along, happily accepting the garbage that is cash shops even if it is worse for them than subscriptions.
The gaming industry gets away with so much trash it is amazing. All you need to see is the sheer amount of pre-order, deluxe edition, cash shop, DLC junk that exists in gaming today. Those who do not accept these trends or these business practices will always be in the minority because most people do not want to care about these things. They just want their shinies and their fun, even if they are getting scammed in the process.
I get the overall point, but that's a pretty broad stroke you're painting with. The game is advertised that way, the players know going in what they are getting and what they will likely get in updates, I think the data would be a bit different with a competitive game that doesn't have a shop and then later on includes one which sells weapons that are more effective.
I also don't believe that the people here on this site are complaining about games like BF Heroes, I think their complaints are more narrow of a certain game type. Blizzard could certainly do it now, but I would say that's only after several years of easing everyone into it, I doubt there would be much shock if any, the playerbase there is already pretty numb from the Xp boosts to the instant level cap, so I think your data is situational at best.
You never really said what the point of the thread was anyway, did you want to tell people to shut up about p2w? or did you want to say that you really love that style and hope more games use it? I don't understand your message that you want us all to hear.
You should look at Cousin's data more closely.
They also found that the people that complained the loudest about P2W, were also the people the were the people most likely to use it. The big complainers were also the big spenders.
This ^
What people should be taking away from the vid is the reality behind game development. Things like costs, and what some games have to do to remain functioning. Something the video illustrates is how (most) game developers don't actually want to do these kinds of things to their games. Most people get into game development because they enjoy games, gaming, and want to make good games. However, in the real world, people also need to worry about things like eating, paying bills, and providing for their family. This is why some of the better developers tend to alternate between standard productions (often to refered to as 'bread & butter' work), and passion projects (interesting ideas that generally do not make much, if any, money).
Instead, many people (especially on these boards) just use this as another excuse for a witchhunt against developers. Even though the fault often lies (at least partially) in the gamer's wallets.
Perhaps you should take your own advice? Nothing about the GAH or the RMAH was pay to win; they simply served as a place where players could sell items which they found through game play, but didn't need. It would only be P2W if Blizzard were the ones selling the goods. Furthermore, anything in the AH can be found by anyone.
By your logic, any game with an auction house mechanic is P2W.
AN' DERE AIN'T NO SUCH FING AS ENUFF DAKKA, YA GROT! Enuff'z more than ya got an' less than too much an' there ain't no such fing as too much dakka. Say dere is, and me Squiggoff'z eatin' tonight!
We are born of the blood. Made men by the blood. Undone by the blood. Our eyes are yet to open. FEAR THE OLD BLOOD.
#IStandWithVic
when you start selling advantages you split your community into 3 parts.
1) People who leave and never come back (me included).
2) People who dont know how to play fair and are willing to pay to constantly win and be on the top leaderboard to show off.
3) People who are so commited to the game that they dont want to leave the game they love so are basically forced to buy advantages because the #2 people are now always unfairly winning with their purchased advantages.
These companies abuse that power becuse they dont know how to properly run a long term online game. This guy in the video admitted they learned the wrong thing from Korea. Koreans prefer to buy advantages. If you want to sell advantages to korean buyers then keep your servers for korea only.