i generally disagree that most of MMORPGs are creatively ugly since there are games such as atlantica that delivers new horizon for the genre.. as we can agree most of MMOs are too repetitive and dull. i am referring to generally all (except atlantica which is turn-based combat system) are all hack-and-slash games.. Its about time that a innovations like this come into the picture..
Exactly. The "new strategy" should be: The "new strategy" should not be:
Like I said earlier, you're a year and a half late in complaining about this. Sony made it abundantly clear in June 2007 that this was the direction they were heading in, and they have long since made up their mind.
What you want from them and what they've been doing for the last 18 months are total opposites, and they're not going to suddenly change their business plan because someone on a message board creates bullet pointed lists of what they should and should not do.
They have seen tangible financial success from their trading card games and their RMT servers in EQ and EQ2, and they know they need to change strategies because their online games are dead in the water except for their flagship EverQuset titles. They also want to broaden their audience to appeal to a younger, more diverse crowd that, given the proven success of RMT games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero, clearly have no problem paying for additional content for their games.
They've said for almost two years now that they're moving away from a subscription model, and that they also want to move away from the men in tights high fantasy settings of games like EQ and EQ2. That's why they've got The Agency, DC Universe Online, and Free Realms coming out. And that's why the chances of them giving you a game that you're pining for are almost nil. Their goals and your demands are on opposite sides.
Originally posted by Lidane Their goals and your demands are on opposite sides.
You are wrong. I think this is again where you miss the point, but that is OK.
My goals, and theirs, are the same: a successful title. They cannot produce one because they are not listening to the MMORPG community. Hence, they are now using payment schemes to mask that inability to create a successful MMORPG.
If they wanted "profits," which they do, they would make a game that harnesses the strong features in World of Warcraft, expand on immersion features, and implement innovative elements.
In my gaming infancy, I traversed dangerous swamplands with no compass, no map, and only the clothes on my back with a latern that barely worked. Dangers lurked in the shadows, and you had to watch where you ran for fear you would be slain by some creature.
Today, SOE announced a method whereby players can purchase items, and EA's future Star Wars title will have some microtransactional payment scheme.
It is no longer about art. It is about money.
It's always been about money.
If this economic model succeeds it's because it's what most gamers want. It's that simple.
It evolves around the same impulses in a casino to make people gamble. The young and naive are especially prone to have suggestion planted in their minds then follow through with that suggestion for the purchase.
The systems success counts on the this impulse, only gambling is replaced with having to be better than other players. Did you see all the news MapleStory created earlier this year? Loads of angry parents whose kids fell into the micro payment trap and all there mini purchases amounted to costs that far exceed the standard monthly sub for P2P MMO's
SOE sat up and took notice. This is what they're hoping for. Because of MapleStory more people are aware of the hidden traps in these micro payment systems. More people have wised up to this system and it will become less and less successful as more people wise up, especially parents of kids who used their credit cards and see what the first end of the month costs amounts too with all the micro purchases
My goals, and theirs, are the same: a successful title. They cannot produce one because they are not listening to the MMORPG community.
What I said was that their goals and your demands were on opposite sides.
They want a successful game, and they clearly want to move past the deadwood in their game catalog, which is only being kept afloat by EQ and EQ2 at this point, and only due to the EverQuest brand name. They also want to broaden their audience to a younger, more diverse crowd that has few, if any issues with buying items for games through RMT and microtransactions.
What you want them to do is go back and remake the original EQ with whatever new upgrades you think they should put in. They're never going to do that. They've moved on as a company, as games like The Agency, DC Universe Online, and Free Realms prove, though they still keep their EQ and EQ2 players occupied.
From their POV, they ARE listening to the community. It's their active, current subscribers that are paying money hand over fist for items on the StationExchange servers and for booster packs and decks for Legends of Norrath above and beyond the standard monthly fee that have made the loudest statements of all. People are willing to pay real money for in-game items and they've proven it time and again. All Sony is doing here is expanding the model.
I think that at this point, SOE have seen what trying to compete directly with Blizzard has gotten them-- a shrunken player base, and no real traction in trying to poach players from WoW. Why would they continue to try and churn out games in that mold? It's a dumb idea. They're better off trying newer models, newer ideas, and newer IP's than they are in trying to do what Blizzard does. It's like EA deciding that they're going to try and develop newer IP's like Mirror's Edge and Dead Space instead of shoveling out the same games year after year. Sure, they've still got their cash cows making money, but they're also trying new things, too.
It evolves around the same impulses in a casino to make people gamble. The young and naive are especially prone to have suggestion planted in their minds then follow through with that suggestion for the purchase. The systems success counts on the this impulse, only gambling is replaced with having to be better than other players. Did you see all the news MapleStory created earlier this year? Loads of angry parents whose kids fell into the micro payment trap and all there mini purchases amounted to costs that far exceed the standard monthly sub for P2P MMO's
SOE sat up and took notice. This is what they're hoping for. Because of MapleStory more people are aware of the hidden traps in these micro payment systems. More people have wised up to this system and it will become less and less successful as more people wise up, especially parents of kids who used their credit cards and see what the first end of the month costs amounts too with all the micro purchases
You are exactly right:
these payment schemes are designed to take advantage of, and are abusive to, the consumer.
The future content, gameplay, features, inter alia. will all be created around these payment schemes:
Gamers will be forced/required to make these microtransactions, pay-for-access to certain content or zones, and purchase in-game items to progress and play the game.
In many respects, after forking-over how much for the title, though you do get one free month, 15.00 is increasingly looking expensive to me. The irony is that these payment schemes will be sold as an innovative way to provide for the MMORPG gamer.
Truth? It is yet another way to destroy the MMORPG as an art and turn it into a product.
Originally posted by declaredemer It is no longer about art. It is about money.
Exactly.
But it is truth that there is a new generation of developers who will be showing their first creations, soon we will see 3 games, Fallen Earth, Guildwars 2 and Darkfall. This 3 seem like they are going for the game and more than the money...
Oh, and to those people who compared "life with a bussisness" i have somehing to tell you.
You are despicable and you should burn in hell for your terrible missconception about life and living.
Good post OP. Glad to see there are still some people out there that do get it and are not brainwashed.
We need to fight back. We have been pushed-around for a long time. We have tolerated forced-raiding; we have tolerated forced gameplay; we have tolerated a lack of customization; we have tolerated no world immersion; we have tolerated content that is boring and addicting.
We will not tolerate these payment schemes designed to get more of our money. Take more of our money without innovating, creating, developing, and implementing immersion features such as those that exist in titles like Grand Theft Auto IV.
Want more money? MAKE A BETTER GAME! Better yet, make a game WE want!
Psssst... we got WoW-style gaming; it is called World of Warcraft. Heard of it?
Well that's the thing, you might not tolerate it, "he" might not tolerate it, but "they" might just tolerate it and want it.
If a game company releases a game with a cash shop of sorts and no one plays then message sent.
But if they do and people play it then they will continue. Which brings me to the person who said we want to earn our items and levels...
do we? I bet there are players who just want to quest and do pvp and look good doing it. It's the experience of the gameplay and not the earning that they are interested in.
It is they who will have no problem with this.
They don't want to make "Hero Zed from the kingdom of Blafesto", they already want to BE "Hero Zed" and then they want to be plugged into a world where they can quest and pvp to their heart's content.
edit: so sure, fight back but you might be the only one.. maybe several hundred thousand? Who knows.
I can already tell you that though I don't want to pay for xp items I have no issues whatsoever paying for cosmetic items.
So already the slippery slope is being slid down. Now get the people who will pay for cosmetic items AND XP potions... etc, etc.
That is fine but these players should always realize that they shouldn't have to pay extra to get the game they want. I think people should not play games that have subscription cost + RMT. RMT is a different business mode for games that do not charge a monthly fee. If people still play these games that are trying to push RMT + Subscription rates then it only enforces that they can get more money out of us.
These players that just want to quest and pvp and look good doing it should wait for the game that provides this for them without the additional cost of purchasing virtual cash. There will be games that provide that experience and the current crop of games are going that way anyhow. I personally would not pay a subscription based game that also implements RMT. I personally play games just for some fun entertainment, I don't won't real life finances drug into it.
I am one of these players that find it silly that some people buy items and gold online. It is a game, I can easily obtain that stuff eventually. It gives me goals in my game to achieve. Anyhow games that are currently out now, do not require any tedious collection of gold or items. You can obtain it yourself in a matter of weeks. If I had so little time to play a GAME that I would have to result to purchasing stuff with real life money than I shouldn't even play. Because if I did I would be missing the point .. it is a game, I am not paying for a game so I can pay someone else to play it.
I will go find another hobby or find a game that suits my time constraints.
The two main proprietors of this thread do not want innovation. They have the largest pair of rose colored glasses know to man. They want giant time sinks, and 16 hour play sessions to accomplish one thing, this way they can sit in their computer chair, and claim they "Earned it".
I don't consider virtual cash innovation. Virtual cash is just greed plain and simple. Stop preaching about how everyone here is stuck back in EQ days. This is about greed and virtual items for real life cash. There is nothing innovative about this.
This does nothing to help the players, there is no new cool game play technology at work here. There could have implemented many many cool in game features to add these conveniences "for the players" instead of making them fork out real life cash in an item shop. They could have easily made quest or other means to obtain these items or they could have just reduced the xp if that was there goal ... no it isn't there goal is to squeeze more money from the pockets of their dwindling playerbase. I really hope people do not fall for this sham and go play something that does not follow these practices .. a game company that offers these conveniences for the already monthly fee you pay.
I don't know why you have such a big beef with EQ, it was a wonderful game but it is garbage now and their business practices are very greedy. I liked EQ trilogy but I also liked WoW, Vanguard, LOTRO, etc etc. Do think they all did everything right? No. I would like another EQ style game, after all choices are great.
I am glad we live in a free market society hopefully people will be smart enough to migrate away from shoddy greedy game companies that make you pay extra for things that should be in game.
Threads like this are posted constantly, but, seriously, there are games that are being innovative in content and gameplay, they just aren't being made by the big companies. If you want innovative gameplay to succeed, support the games that are being innovating, such as The Chronicles of Spellborn. This is out in EU already (but not UK), and will be out pretty much everywhere else soon.
Exactly. And what about Ryzom? How many people are flocking to that?
In the end it comes down to "well, that game really didn't interest me". Ok, fair enough, but game companies can't keep churning out endless games just in case someone likes one of them.
True you shouldn't play something you aren't interested in but indie companies only have so many resources. If they fail and keep failing then all you are going to have are the larger games.
But again, the gaming industry is going through what music and theater and art went through. Eventually there is a commoditization of the product and the things that are different fall at the far ends of the bell curve.
Also, those that stopped playing for whatever reason actually expect mmo companies to cater to them? That would be the case if the genre is actually declining, and there's no reasonable source to prove that, sorry.
Things will come around or they won't. Get over the hurt and move on. It's hard to like something new with regret already set in beforehand.
The two main proprietors of this thread do not want innovation. They have the largest pair of rose colored glasses know to man. They want giant time sinks, and 16 hour play sessions to accomplish one thing, this way they can sit in their computer chair, and claim they "Earned it".
I don't consider virtual cash innovation. Virtual cash is just greed plain and simple. Stop preaching about how everyone here is stuck back in EQ days. This is about greed and virtual items for real life cash. There is nothing innovative about this.
This does nothing to help the players, there is no new cool game play technology at work here. There could have implemented many many cool in game features to add these conveniences "for the players" instead of making them fork out real life cash in an item shop. They could have easily made quest or other means to obtain these items or they could have just reduced the xp if that was there goal ... no it isn't there goal is to squeeze more money from the pockets of their dwindling playerbase. I really hope people do not fall for this sham and go play something that does not follow these practices .. a game company that offers these conveniences for the already monthly fee you pay.
I don't know why you have such a big beef with EQ, it was a wonderful game but it is garbage now and their business practices are very greedy. I liked EQ trilogy but I also liked WoW, Vanguard, LOTRO, etc etc. Do think they all did everything right? No. I would like another EQ style game, after all choices are great.
I am glad we live in a free market society hopefully people will be smart enough to migrate away from shoddy greedy game companies that make you pay extra for things that should be in game.
Right you are!
First of all, most of these "innovative monetizing schemes" in the West are on dead, dying, or desperate games; games that have already lost the majority of their players or have trouble extracting revenue. The best, most popular game out there right now has a paltry card game, which is the extent of anything that can be considered a "microtransaction" game.
Secondly, I both agree and disagree with the naysayers in this thread. It is a common misconception that it is understandable for businesses to put money making first. The problem with that is that no person who truly believes that a business only cares about money will patron them. That's because we don't go to a business like SOE to give them money. We go to them because they claim they do their art well, and we pay them so they can continue to do their art well. You see, at some point a business has to choose which is more important: the art, or the money-making. If the money-making is more important, then they have to lie, deceive, and cheat in order to convince us that their focus is still on practicing their art well. They have to do so, because they no longer practice their trade for the sake of doing the trade well.
The reason SOE is losing the war against Blizzard is because they have shown themselves to be lovers of money, and not good games. That's because for a period of many years, they placed an additional pricetag on everything; compromising the integrity of the game to make more cash. Now of course, some have argued here that if we don't like it we should not patron such games. Well, we aren't. But what's the best that can come out of that situation but dead games and dead industries? Dead games and dead industries don't help we who like these things. That is why we voice our opinions, hoping to change the industry attitude on these things.
And the industry would best hear our message, because this emphasis on card games, RMT, auction houses, microtransactions, and this sort of thing has the potential to open up a legal, customer service, and developmental can of worms the likes of which the industry has never seen. Because now if you take an item from someone's virtual character, it is now petty theft. If someone's inventory gets wiped because of server error, it is now negligence. If you mess with the stats on an item, it is now damaging property. If you change the drop rate or the probability of loots acquired from RMT lotteries, it is now racketeering. Money changes everything, possession is nine-tenths of the law, and these things that once had no real standing now have plenty under the commercial codes and gaming laws of states.
But you see, that's what happens when the publishers turn a recreational pursuit into a hard core money-making scheme. Because if they are going to pursue money-making with all the seriousness that they once pursued excellence in computer entertainment, the players will protect their investments just as any other owner of chattel property. In short, these "games" won't be games anymore.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
You guys are acting like they are selling swords and armor. They are not. Its xp increases, cosmetic items and fluff. All on top of the already existing game.
This comes down to jealousy and keeping up with the joneses mentality. Somehow, some of you fell slighted because bob bought a potion for 1$ that gave him a 5% XP increase as he gains XP.
For those of you that bring up blizzard, they are ALSO doing this. There is a thread here bitching about it to.
Innovation in games, has nothing to do with modernizing to revenue models, such as added value, ala-cart, or micro transactions, that have been proven to work.
They are two separate things.
And everyone is forgetting that some of those models, save players money, because you can play how you want, and pay how you want, and not pay for things you do not need/want.
Who cares if bob gets +5% to XP and has some hot pants that do nothing.
This thread is a thinly veiled ruse to promote how "Hardcore" it was back in the day, and how "kids this days" have it easy. As if games are supposed to be anything other than fun and entertainment.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
You guys are acting like they are selling swords and armor. They are not. Its xp increases, cosmetic items and fluff. All on top of the already existing game. This comes down to jealousy and keeping up with the joneses mentality. Somehow, some of you fell slighted because bob bought a potion for 1$ that gave him a 5% XP increase as he gains XP.
For those of you that bring up blizzard, they are ALSO doing this. There is a thread here bitching about it to. Innovation in games, has nothing to do with modernizing to revenue models, such as added value, ala-cart, or micro transactions, that have been proven to work. They are two separate things. And everyone is forgetting that some of those models, save players money, because you can play how you want, and pay how you want, and not pay for things you do not need/want. Who cares if bob gets +5% to XP and has some hot pants that do nothing. This thread is a thinly veiled ruse to promote how "Hardcore" it was back in the day, and how "kids this days" have it easy. As if games are supposed to be anything other than fun and entertainment.
I am sorry but I don't care how insignificant it is to you. That 5% to XP and hot pants in any other monthly fee game would be included ... you don't have to pay extra. That is the point. If you want to make it an RMT game then fine do so .. drop the subcription. I for one will not be playing a monthly subscription fee game that holds some of it's content back, no matter how insignificant it is for additional fees that other games will provide without the additional cost.
If you want to continue to pay for the game then fine but I will not be supportting those type of business practices. It is about greed that I will not support. If the XP curve is not working and the game requires additional adjustments you should not have to buy it from the company. The game should come with everything when you buy the game, expansions and pay your monthly fee. It is about "options" alright but not for the players. It is about different options of paying SOE more money for their games.
Read Blizzard's forums it has been posted they will not be doing this.
Originally posted by qombiOriginally posted by Mrbloodworth
You guys are acting like they are selling swords and armor. They are not. Its xp increases, cosmetic items and fluff. All on top of the already existing game. This comes down to jealousy and keeping up with the joneses mentality. Somehow, some of you fell slighted because bob bought a potion for 1$ that gave him a 5% XP increase as he gains XP.
For those of you that bring up blizzard, they are ALSO doing this. There is a thread here bitching about it to. Innovation in games, has nothing to do with modernizing to revenue models, such as added value, ala-cart, or micro transactions, that have been proven to work. They are two separate things. And everyone is forgetting that some of those models, save players money, because you can play how you want, and pay how you want, and not pay for things you do not need/want. Who cares if bob gets +5% to XP and has some hot pants that do nothing. This thread is a thinly veiled ruse to promote how "Hardcore" it was back in the day, and how "kids this days" have it easy. As if games are supposed to be anything other than fun and entertainment.
Read Blizzard's forums it has been posted they will not be doing this.
They allready are, just in diffrent forms.
---------- "Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
I am about to give-up on this industry. It is involuntary, but the direction is has gone is:
Repetitive, boring
Predictable
Static
Dumbed-down
Anti-customization, and
Ripp off payment schemes
"recustomization"
online shops for in-game items
pay-for-content
other
It is depressing, and demoralizing, to see this happen to an area within the gaming umbrella became so greedy and tasteless.
Edit: And, I will tell you what, I am encouraged by single-player games. Look at the brilliance, depth, challenge, fun, and so many varied features of Grand Theft Auto IV. The game is so brilliant, and successful, EA attempted to acquire the company to destroy it.
Grand Theft Auto IV prevails.
MMORPGs are losing, and only getting worse.
The irony, still, is that the community rejects EA and SOE.
And if Blizzard goes down this path, the community will reject it as well.
As long as a game is fun non of this tcg or other crap bothers me, i play games for fun, nothing from these other things being sold are required for me to have fun.
I really do think single player games are better for most that post here, i have been playing games since well crap i can't even remember that's how long and the main this has always been "am i having fun" if not i find something else, why bitch about it?
if you can't have fun in an mmo because someone can buy something you can't or whatever then that sounds like a personal problem. If one of these mmo's i play decide to start selling armor and weapons i still wont' care. I know some will say but it will give an edge to blah blah blah, well somebody will always have an edge over you one way or the other.
Plenty of single player games out there for those who can't handle the mmo world changing.
Edit: as for blizzard, people need to rearch why they are charging, because i'm getting tired of typing it lol...the players there said they would pay, so they got what they wanted, there was some bitching at first but its pretty much died out and people are already discussing the things they want to change and already asking for ways to change things and pay for it...blame the players not the company.
"The great thing about human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the matter at hand." - Lewis Thomas
I am about to give-up on this industry. It is involuntary
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means:
Main Entry: in·vol·un·tary
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English involuntari, from Late Latin involuntarius, from Latin in- + voluntarius voluntary
Date: 15th century
1 : done contrary to or without choice 2 : compulsory 3 : not subject to control of the will : reflex
You are making a choice for your own reasons. That is not, and will never be, involuntary.
You quitting MMO's because the companies won't bend to your will about what you think games should be like isn't involuntary. I don't care how many bullet points or font colors you throw around or how much you whine that your choice is being taken away from you because the mean developers are listening to the market and acting like the businesses they have always been. There is ALWAYS a choice when it comes to whether or not you play a game, or a genre of games.
I don't think that is the same thing. This is a service that has nothing to do with items. This is a service that someone at blizzard will have to do on their side thus a fee is required. It is not the same thing at all, I consider this similar to a server transfer.
I am about to give-up on this industry. It is involuntary
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means:
Main Entry: in·vol·un·tary
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English involuntari, from Late Latin involuntarius, from Latin in- + voluntarius voluntary
Date: 15th century
1 : done contrary to or without choice 2 : compulsory 3 : not subject to control of the will : reflex
You are making a choice for your own reasons. That is not, and will never be, involuntary.
You quitting MMO's because the companies won't bend to your will about what you think games should be like isn't involuntary. I don't care how many bullet points or font colors you throw around or how much you whine that your choice is being taken away from you because the mean developers are listening to the market and acting like the businesses they have always been. There is ALWAYS a choice when it comes to whether or not you play a game, or a genre of games.
I think the people who subbed to EQ and EQ2 were subject to an involuntary change in their service. In other words, the software they purchased is only able to be enjoyed if they submit to this crazy scheme; something that they had no knowledge of when the decision was made to purchase the software. When they purchased the game, it was one thing. Now it's something else that they would have never bought into had they knew.
Seeing as how they aren't going to get their $50 box, expansions, and sub fees back when they quit over these crazy schemes, the publishers have them over a barrel.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Originally posted by Beatnik59 I think the people who subbed to EQ and EQ2 were subject to an involuntary change in their service. In other words, the software they purchased is only able to be enjoyed if they submit to this crazy scheme; something that they had no knowledge of when the decision was made to purchase the software. When they purchased the game, it was one thing. Now it's something else that they would have never bought into had they knew. Seeing as how they aren't going to get their $50 box, expansions, and sub fees back when they quit over these crazy schemes, the publishers have them over a barrel.
If anyone subscribing to a Sony game didn't see this coming, they haven't paid attention to what SOE have been saying for the past several years.
Once the StationExchange went in and was a massive, profitable hit, the dollar signs were there. Toss in the Legends of Norrath TCG across both EQ and EQ2, where you pay real money for virtual cards on the hope of getting an in-game piece of uber loot, and the very public statements that SOE have made for the past 18 months about wanting to move away from a straight subscription model and towards an RMT/microtransaction one, and this was not a surprise at all.
It is also no accident that the StationCash program is almost identical in function to the PlayStation Store, down to the virtual wallet that you fill first, then spend money out of. Sony has been moving in this direction as a company for a long time now. This is not new.
I'm not an SOE fan by any means, and I don't play any of their games, but seriously -- if you didn't see this coming you just weren't paying attention. They've been signaling this change in direction for years now.
They've been signaling this change in direction for years now.
No they have not. Please do not spread misinformation if you were not an EQ player.
I was an EQ player for years.
They have time and time again denied they were going to do this. Not only have they denied it, they have publicly stated they would never make such a change on many occasions:
Smedley for EQ2:
Originally Posted by Smed
I've been a regular lurker on this site for a while but I wanted to step in here and dispel something that's just plain not true - I don't have my name highlighted here, but anyone that doubts it's me can email me at jsmedley@soe.sony.com and I'll happily reply.
We aren't going to be allowing RMT in any way, shape or form on the non-exchange enabled EQ II servers. Period. End of statement.
In any event, I wanted to stop in and at least set the record straight - you aren't going to be seeing RMT allowed on the non-exchange enabled servers.
John Smedley
President, Sony Online Entertainment"
EQ1 Lead Designer, by Rytan the Wyrmlord, 6 months ago:
We have no plans what so ever to do actual sales of in game items, and I'm personally very opposed to the idea for EverQuest. I think microtransations can be a valid business model if planned from the ground up for a game, but it would be very very bad for EQ.
So today, Sony Online intends to unveil its plan to retake leadership in online gaming by unveiling three new games in development. More broadly, the new games represent an attempt to broaden the company in four major ways: diversifying its business model, expanding the demographic profile of its customer base, moving into the console market in addition to making games for PCs and increasing its presence in Asia.
“Right now our revenue is almost all subscriptions,” John Smedley, the unit’s president, said in an interview.“In two years, we would like to see no more than 50 percent of our revenue coming from subscriptions, and five years from now we think less than 10 percent of our revenue will come from subscription sources.”
At the same time, Mr. Smedley said he wanted to diversify his customer base, which is 85 percent male and 32 years old, on average. Women have become the major driver of the casual games business (games like Bejeweled and Bookworm), and Mr. Smedley wants a piece of that action.
“We want to get our average age lower, probably into the low 20s, and I’d really like to see the gender breakdown go to 50-50 or even slightly more women than men, to reflect real life,” he said.
Later, in the same article:
In general, Mr. Smedley wants to replace subscriptions with a combination of microtransactions, advertising and what he calls the “velvet rope” approach.
That was a year and a half ago. Throw in the obvious financial successes of the Station Exchange servers in EQ, where SOE gets a 10% cut of sales, and the Legends of Norrath game, and this has been a long time coming. They are moving closer towards having a larger part of their revenue coming from sources other than subscriptions.
It is no accident that StationCash also functions almost exactly like the PlayStation Store. On the PSS, you have a virtual wallet that you fill with money, then spend money out of that wallet to buy games or other downloadable content. Sound familiar? It's damn near identical.
This has been the strategy at Sony for some time now, and they've been working towards it. It was not a surprise to anyone who has really been paying attention to the signals they've been sending.
Comments
i generally disagree that most of MMORPGs are creatively ugly since there are games such as atlantica that delivers new horizon for the genre.. as we can agree most of MMOs are too repetitive and dull. i am referring to generally all (except atlantica which is turn-based combat system) are all hack-and-slash games.. Its about time that a innovations like this come into the picture..
And that is what is coming to our MMORPGs.
Crap games, but people dumb enough to participate and get ripped off by these payment schemes.
Creativity? Innovation? Who cares! The payment scheme is what matters. It is ugly.
They need a new strategy to improve their online games division.
Exactly.
The "new strategy" should be:
The "new strategy" should not be:
Like I said earlier, you're a year and a half late in complaining about this. Sony made it abundantly clear in June 2007 that this was the direction they were heading in, and they have long since made up their mind.
What you want from them and what they've been doing for the last 18 months are total opposites, and they're not going to suddenly change their business plan because someone on a message board creates bullet pointed lists of what they should and should not do.
They have seen tangible financial success from their trading card games and their RMT servers in EQ and EQ2, and they know they need to change strategies because their online games are dead in the water except for their flagship EverQuset titles. They also want to broaden their audience to appeal to a younger, more diverse crowd that, given the proven success of RMT games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero, clearly have no problem paying for additional content for their games.
They've said for almost two years now that they're moving away from a subscription model, and that they also want to move away from the men in tights high fantasy settings of games like EQ and EQ2. That's why they've got The Agency, DC Universe Online, and Free Realms coming out. And that's why the chances of them giving you a game that you're pining for are almost nil. Their goals and your demands are on opposite sides.
You are wrong. I think this is again where you miss the point, but that is OK.
My goals, and theirs, are the same: a successful title. They cannot produce one because they are not listening to the MMORPG community. Hence, they are now using payment schemes to mask that inability to create a successful MMORPG.
If they wanted "profits," which they do, they would make a game that harnesses the strong features in World of Warcraft, expand on immersion features, and implement innovative elements.
It's always been about money.
If this economic model succeeds it's because it's what most gamers want. It's that simple.
It evolves around the same impulses in a casino to make people gamble. The young and naive are especially prone to have suggestion planted in their minds then follow through with that suggestion for the purchase.
The systems success counts on the this impulse, only gambling is replaced with having to be better than other players. Did you see all the news MapleStory created earlier this year? Loads of angry parents whose kids fell into the micro payment trap and all there mini purchases amounted to costs that far exceed the standard monthly sub for P2P MMO's
SOE sat up and took notice. This is what they're hoping for. Because of MapleStory more people are aware of the hidden traps in these micro payment systems. More people have wised up to this system and it will become less and less successful as more people wise up, especially parents of kids who used their credit cards and see what the first end of the month costs amounts too with all the micro purchases
What I said was that their goals and your demands were on opposite sides.
They want a successful game, and they clearly want to move past the deadwood in their game catalog, which is only being kept afloat by EQ and EQ2 at this point, and only due to the EverQuest brand name. They also want to broaden their audience to a younger, more diverse crowd that has few, if any issues with buying items for games through RMT and microtransactions.
What you want them to do is go back and remake the original EQ with whatever new upgrades you think they should put in. They're never going to do that. They've moved on as a company, as games like The Agency, DC Universe Online, and Free Realms prove, though they still keep their EQ and EQ2 players occupied.
From their POV, they ARE listening to the community. It's their active, current subscribers that are paying money hand over fist for items on the StationExchange servers and for booster packs and decks for Legends of Norrath above and beyond the standard monthly fee that have made the loudest statements of all. People are willing to pay real money for in-game items and they've proven it time and again. All Sony is doing here is expanding the model.
I think that at this point, SOE have seen what trying to compete directly with Blizzard has gotten them-- a shrunken player base, and no real traction in trying to poach players from WoW. Why would they continue to try and churn out games in that mold? It's a dumb idea. They're better off trying newer models, newer ideas, and newer IP's than they are in trying to do what Blizzard does. It's like EA deciding that they're going to try and develop newer IP's like Mirror's Edge and Dead Space instead of shoveling out the same games year after year. Sure, they've still got their cash cows making money, but they're also trying new things, too.
You are exactly right:
The future content, gameplay, features, inter alia. will all be created around these payment schemes:
In many respects, after forking-over how much for the title, though you do get one free month, 15.00 is increasingly looking expensive to me. The irony is that these payment schemes will be sold as an innovative way to provide for the MMORPG gamer.
Truth? It is yet another way to destroy the MMORPG as an art and turn it into a product.
Exactly.
But it is truth that there is a new generation of developers who will be showing their first creations, soon we will see 3 games, Fallen Earth, Guildwars 2 and Darkfall. This 3 seem like they are going for the game and more than the money...
Oh, and to those people who compared "life with a bussisness" i have somehing to tell you.
You are despicable and you should burn in hell for your terrible missconception about life and living.
SOE and EA are drooling over ZT Online profits and will do anything to get that RMT system into there games.
We need to fight back. We have been pushed-around for a long time. We have tolerated forced-raiding; we have tolerated forced gameplay; we have tolerated a lack of customization; we have tolerated no world immersion; we have tolerated content that is boring and addicting.
We will not tolerate these payment schemes designed to get more of our money. Take more of our money without innovating, creating, developing, and implementing immersion features such as those that exist in titles like Grand Theft Auto IV.
Want more money? MAKE A BETTER GAME! Better yet, make a game WE want!
Psssst... we got WoW-style gaming; it is called World of Warcraft. Heard of it?
Well that's the thing, you might not tolerate it, "he" might not tolerate it, but "they" might just tolerate it and want it.
If a game company releases a game with a cash shop of sorts and no one plays then message sent.
But if they do and people play it then they will continue. Which brings me to the person who said we want to earn our items and levels...
do we? I bet there are players who just want to quest and do pvp and look good doing it. It's the experience of the gameplay and not the earning that they are interested in.
It is they who will have no problem with this.
They don't want to make "Hero Zed from the kingdom of Blafesto", they already want to BE "Hero Zed" and then they want to be plugged into a world where they can quest and pvp to their heart's content.
edit: so sure, fight back but you might be the only one.. maybe several hundred thousand? Who knows.
I can already tell you that though I don't want to pay for xp items I have no issues whatsoever paying for cosmetic items.
So already the slippery slope is being slid down. Now get the people who will pay for cosmetic items AND XP potions... etc, etc.
That is fine but these players should always realize that they shouldn't have to pay extra to get the game they want. I think people should not play games that have subscription cost + RMT. RMT is a different business mode for games that do not charge a monthly fee. If people still play these games that are trying to push RMT + Subscription rates then it only enforces that they can get more money out of us.
These players that just want to quest and pvp and look good doing it should wait for the game that provides this for them without the additional cost of purchasing virtual cash. There will be games that provide that experience and the current crop of games are going that way anyhow. I personally would not pay a subscription based game that also implements RMT. I personally play games just for some fun entertainment, I don't won't real life finances drug into it.
I am one of these players that find it silly that some people buy items and gold online. It is a game, I can easily obtain that stuff eventually. It gives me goals in my game to achieve. Anyhow games that are currently out now, do not require any tedious collection of gold or items. You can obtain it yourself in a matter of weeks. If I had so little time to play a GAME that I would have to result to purchasing stuff with real life money than I shouldn't even play. Because if I did I would be missing the point .. it is a game, I am not paying for a game so I can pay someone else to play it.
I will go find another hobby or find a game that suits my time constraints.
I don't consider virtual cash innovation. Virtual cash is just greed plain and simple. Stop preaching about how everyone here is stuck back in EQ days. This is about greed and virtual items for real life cash. There is nothing innovative about this.
This does nothing to help the players, there is no new cool game play technology at work here. There could have implemented many many cool in game features to add these conveniences "for the players" instead of making them fork out real life cash in an item shop. They could have easily made quest or other means to obtain these items or they could have just reduced the xp if that was there goal ... no it isn't there goal is to squeeze more money from the pockets of their dwindling playerbase. I really hope people do not fall for this sham and go play something that does not follow these practices .. a game company that offers these conveniences for the already monthly fee you pay.
I don't know why you have such a big beef with EQ, it was a wonderful game but it is garbage now and their business practices are very greedy. I liked EQ trilogy but I also liked WoW, Vanguard, LOTRO, etc etc. Do think they all did everything right? No. I would like another EQ style game, after all choices are great.
I am glad we live in a free market society hopefully people will be smart enough to migrate away from shoddy greedy game companies that make you pay extra for things that should be in game.
Exactly. And what about Ryzom? How many people are flocking to that?
In the end it comes down to "well, that game really didn't interest me". Ok, fair enough, but game companies can't keep churning out endless games just in case someone likes one of them.
True you shouldn't play something you aren't interested in but indie companies only have so many resources. If they fail and keep failing then all you are going to have are the larger games.
But again, the gaming industry is going through what music and theater and art went through. Eventually there is a commoditization of the product and the things that are different fall at the far ends of the bell curve.
Also, those that stopped playing for whatever reason actually expect mmo companies to cater to them? That would be the case if the genre is actually declining, and there's no reasonable source to prove that, sorry.
Things will come around or they won't. Get over the hurt and move on. It's hard to like something new with regret already set in beforehand.
I don't consider virtual cash innovation. Virtual cash is just greed plain and simple. Stop preaching about how everyone here is stuck back in EQ days. This is about greed and virtual items for real life cash. There is nothing innovative about this.
This does nothing to help the players, there is no new cool game play technology at work here. There could have implemented many many cool in game features to add these conveniences "for the players" instead of making them fork out real life cash in an item shop. They could have easily made quest or other means to obtain these items or they could have just reduced the xp if that was there goal ... no it isn't there goal is to squeeze more money from the pockets of their dwindling playerbase. I really hope people do not fall for this sham and go play something that does not follow these practices .. a game company that offers these conveniences for the already monthly fee you pay.
I don't know why you have such a big beef with EQ, it was a wonderful game but it is garbage now and their business practices are very greedy. I liked EQ trilogy but I also liked WoW, Vanguard, LOTRO, etc etc. Do think they all did everything right? No. I would like another EQ style game, after all choices are great.
I am glad we live in a free market society hopefully people will be smart enough to migrate away from shoddy greedy game companies that make you pay extra for things that should be in game.
Right you are!
First of all, most of these "innovative monetizing schemes" in the West are on dead, dying, or desperate games; games that have already lost the majority of their players or have trouble extracting revenue. The best, most popular game out there right now has a paltry card game, which is the extent of anything that can be considered a "microtransaction" game.
Secondly, I both agree and disagree with the naysayers in this thread. It is a common misconception that it is understandable for businesses to put money making first. The problem with that is that no person who truly believes that a business only cares about money will patron them. That's because we don't go to a business like SOE to give them money. We go to them because they claim they do their art well, and we pay them so they can continue to do their art well. You see, at some point a business has to choose which is more important: the art, or the money-making. If the money-making is more important, then they have to lie, deceive, and cheat in order to convince us that their focus is still on practicing their art well. They have to do so, because they no longer practice their trade for the sake of doing the trade well.
The reason SOE is losing the war against Blizzard is because they have shown themselves to be lovers of money, and not good games. That's because for a period of many years, they placed an additional pricetag on everything; compromising the integrity of the game to make more cash. Now of course, some have argued here that if we don't like it we should not patron such games. Well, we aren't. But what's the best that can come out of that situation but dead games and dead industries? Dead games and dead industries don't help we who like these things. That is why we voice our opinions, hoping to change the industry attitude on these things.
And the industry would best hear our message, because this emphasis on card games, RMT, auction houses, microtransactions, and this sort of thing has the potential to open up a legal, customer service, and developmental can of worms the likes of which the industry has never seen. Because now if you take an item from someone's virtual character, it is now petty theft. If someone's inventory gets wiped because of server error, it is now negligence. If you mess with the stats on an item, it is now damaging property. If you change the drop rate or the probability of loots acquired from RMT lotteries, it is now racketeering. Money changes everything, possession is nine-tenths of the law, and these things that once had no real standing now have plenty under the commercial codes and gaming laws of states.
But you see, that's what happens when the publishers turn a recreational pursuit into a hard core money-making scheme. Because if they are going to pursue money-making with all the seriousness that they once pursued excellence in computer entertainment, the players will protect their investments just as any other owner of chattel property. In short, these "games" won't be games anymore.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
You guys are acting like they are selling swords and armor. They are not. Its xp increases, cosmetic items and fluff. All on top of the already existing game.
This comes down to jealousy and keeping up with the joneses mentality. Somehow, some of you fell slighted because bob bought a potion for 1$ that gave him a 5% XP increase as he gains XP.
For those of you that bring up blizzard, they are ALSO doing this. There is a thread here bitching about it to.
Innovation in games, has nothing to do with modernizing to revenue models, such as added value, ala-cart, or micro transactions, that have been proven to work.
They are two separate things.
And everyone is forgetting that some of those models, save players money, because you can play how you want, and pay how you want, and not pay for things you do not need/want.
Who cares if bob gets +5% to XP and has some hot pants that do nothing.
This thread is a thinly veiled ruse to promote how "Hardcore" it was back in the day, and how "kids this days" have it easy. As if games are supposed to be anything other than fun and entertainment.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
I am sorry but I don't care how insignificant it is to you. That 5% to XP and hot pants in any other monthly fee game would be included ... you don't have to pay extra. That is the point. If you want to make it an RMT game then fine do so .. drop the subcription. I for one will not be playing a monthly subscription fee game that holds some of it's content back, no matter how insignificant it is for additional fees that other games will provide without the additional cost.
If you want to continue to pay for the game then fine but I will not be supportting those type of business practices. It is about greed that I will not support. If the XP curve is not working and the game requires additional adjustments you should not have to buy it from the company. The game should come with everything when you buy the game, expansions and pay your monthly fee. It is about "options" alright but not for the players. It is about different options of paying SOE more money for their games.
Read Blizzard's forums it has been posted they will not be doing this.
Read Blizzard's forums it has been posted they will not be doing this.
They allready are, just in diffrent forms.
----------
"Anyone posting on this forum is not an average user, and there for any opinions about the game are going to be overly critical compared to an average users opinions." - Me
"No, your wrong.." - Random user #123
"Hello person posting on a site specifically for MMO's in a thread on a sub forum specifically for a particular game talking about meta features and making comparisons to other titles in the genre, and their meta features.
How are you?" -Me
Yeah crazy
us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml
(lifts white towel to throw it into the ring)
I am about to give-up on this industry. It is involuntary, but the direction is has gone is:
It is depressing, and demoralizing, to see this happen to an area within the gaming umbrella became so greedy and tasteless.
Edit: And, I will tell you what, I am encouraged by single-player games. Look at the brilliance, depth, challenge, fun, and so many varied features of Grand Theft Auto IV. The game is so brilliant, and successful, EA attempted to acquire the company to destroy it.
Grand Theft Auto IV prevails.
MMORPGs are losing, and only getting worse.
The irony, still, is that the community rejects EA and SOE.
And if Blizzard goes down this path, the community will reject it as well.
Do not take my word for it.
As long as a game is fun non of this tcg or other crap bothers me, i play games for fun, nothing from these other things being sold are required for me to have fun.
I really do think single player games are better for most that post here, i have been playing games since well crap i can't even remember that's how long and the main this has always been "am i having fun" if not i find something else, why bitch about it?
if you can't have fun in an mmo because someone can buy something you can't or whatever then that sounds like a personal problem. If one of these mmo's i play decide to start selling armor and weapons i still wont' care. I know some will say but it will give an edge to blah blah blah, well somebody will always have an edge over you one way or the other.
Plenty of single player games out there for those who can't handle the mmo world changing.
Edit: as for blizzard, people need to rearch why they are charging, because i'm getting tired of typing it lol...the players there said they would pay, so they got what they wanted, there was some bitching at first but its pretty much died out and people are already discussing the things they want to change and already asking for ways to change things and pay for it...blame the players not the company.
"The great thing about human language is that it prevents us from sticking to the matter at hand."
- Lewis Thomas
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means:
Main Entry: in·vol·un·tary
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English involuntari, from Late Latin involuntarius, from Latin in- + voluntarius voluntary
Date: 15th century
1 : done contrary to or without choice 2 : compulsory 3 : not subject to control of the will : reflex
You are making a choice for your own reasons. That is not, and will never be, involuntary.
You quitting MMO's because the companies won't bend to your will about what you think games should be like isn't involuntary. I don't care how many bullet points or font colors you throw around or how much you whine that your choice is being taken away from you because the mean developers are listening to the market and acting like the businesses they have always been. There is ALWAYS a choice when it comes to whether or not you play a game, or a genre of games.
I don't think that is the same thing. This is a service that has nothing to do with items. This is a service that someone at blizzard will have to do on their side thus a fee is required. It is not the same thing at all, I consider this similar to a server transfer.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means:
Main Entry: in·vol·un·tary
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English involuntari, from Late Latin involuntarius, from Latin in- + voluntarius voluntary
Date: 15th century
1 : done contrary to or without choice 2 : compulsory 3 : not subject to control of the will : reflex
You are making a choice for your own reasons. That is not, and will never be, involuntary.
You quitting MMO's because the companies won't bend to your will about what you think games should be like isn't involuntary. I don't care how many bullet points or font colors you throw around or how much you whine that your choice is being taken away from you because the mean developers are listening to the market and acting like the businesses they have always been. There is ALWAYS a choice when it comes to whether or not you play a game, or a genre of games.
I think the people who subbed to EQ and EQ2 were subject to an involuntary change in their service. In other words, the software they purchased is only able to be enjoyed if they submit to this crazy scheme; something that they had no knowledge of when the decision was made to purchase the software. When they purchased the game, it was one thing. Now it's something else that they would have never bought into had they knew.
Seeing as how they aren't going to get their $50 box, expansions, and sub fees back when they quit over these crazy schemes, the publishers have them over a barrel.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
If anyone subscribing to a Sony game didn't see this coming, they haven't paid attention to what SOE have been saying for the past several years.
Once the StationExchange went in and was a massive, profitable hit, the dollar signs were there. Toss in the Legends of Norrath TCG across both EQ and EQ2, where you pay real money for virtual cards on the hope of getting an in-game piece of uber loot, and the very public statements that SOE have made for the past 18 months about wanting to move away from a straight subscription model and towards an RMT/microtransaction one, and this was not a surprise at all.
It is also no accident that the StationCash program is almost identical in function to the PlayStation Store, down to the virtual wallet that you fill first, then spend money out of. Sony has been moving in this direction as a company for a long time now. This is not new.
I'm not an SOE fan by any means, and I don't play any of their games, but seriously -- if you didn't see this coming you just weren't paying attention. They've been signaling this change in direction for years now.
No they have not. Please do not spread misinformation if you were not an EQ player.
I was an EQ player for years.
They have time and time again denied they were going to do this. Not only have they denied it, they have publicly stated they would never make such a change on many occasions:
Smedley for EQ2:
EQ1 Lead Designer, by Rytan the Wyrmlord, 6 months ago:
No they have not. Please do not spread misinformation if you were not an EQ player.
Yes, they have. For example, this article from the New York Times, dated June 11, 2007:
www.nytimes.com/2007/06/11/business/worldbusiness/11sony.html
So today, Sony Online intends to unveil its plan to retake leadership in online gaming by unveiling three new games in development. More broadly, the new games represent an attempt to broaden the company in four major ways: diversifying its business model, expanding the demographic profile of its customer base, moving into the console market in addition to making games for PCs and increasing its presence in Asia.
“Right now our revenue is almost all subscriptions,” John Smedley, the unit’s president, said in an interview.“In two years, we would like to see no more than 50 percent of our revenue coming from subscriptions, and five years from now we think less than 10 percent of our revenue will come from subscription sources.”
At the same time, Mr. Smedley said he wanted to diversify his customer base, which is 85 percent male and 32 years old, on average. Women have become the major driver of the casual games business (games like Bejeweled and Bookworm), and Mr. Smedley wants a piece of that action.
“We want to get our average age lower, probably into the low 20s, and I’d really like to see the gender breakdown go to 50-50 or even slightly more women than men, to reflect real life,” he said.
Later, in the same article:
In general, Mr. Smedley wants to replace subscriptions with a combination of microtransactions, advertising and what he calls the “velvet rope” approach.
That was a year and a half ago. Throw in the obvious financial successes of the Station Exchange servers in EQ, where SOE gets a 10% cut of sales, and the Legends of Norrath game, and this has been a long time coming. They are moving closer towards having a larger part of their revenue coming from sources other than subscriptions.
It is no accident that StationCash also functions almost exactly like the PlayStation Store. On the PSS, you have a virtual wallet that you fill with money, then spend money out of that wallet to buy games or other downloadable content. Sound familiar? It's damn near identical.
This has been the strategy at Sony for some time now, and they've been working towards it. It was not a surprise to anyone who has really been paying attention to the signals they've been sending.