The new update for DDO has made some changes to some classes, in order to respec one must purchase it through the Store. Latest example from Turbine run F2P game. There are many other changes that are pretty bad as well, go read the forums for DDO people,
As a DDO player and forum reader I don't think you've presented the situation very well.
Yes they are changing how Two Handed Fighting is handled ..... because there is a bad lag problem on the end game side of the house and their testing seems to point at that being the problem. Will it be a nerf from what they have now? Yes. Will it fix the lag problem? I think all are hoping it will and that includes the players. As far as respecing, you can get that stone via loot drops too. It doesn't have to be purchased and considering the number of players that have TR'd anyway already, (no matter how they are getting respec items) I'm guessing it's pretty much not a biggie, just like changing your profession in SWG; you max out, you change and try something new.
The only 'pretty bad' thing I've really seen on the forums concerning Update 5 seems to be with the level of the latest adventure pack. It's aimed at low level characters, which on the face of it sounds bad, except that from a demographic's point of view marketing to the larger player base does make sense and of the last 2 updates one was aimed at the middle level players and the last at the high level players so now doing a low level also makes sense. What doesn't is the fact that low levels have more to do already and aiming the next few at the high levels would have been nice (even though I'm one of those low levels looking forward to the new pack!).
Any game, any update / patch ends up nerfing someone's favorite class. You either play through it, re-roll, change professions (a la SWG) or in DDO's case you TR. Doesn't matter if it's a P2p, F2p or Hybrid payment model.
That might actualy mean something if those very same Turbine posters hadn't posted in those very same forums that Turbine had no plans to go F2P and that it would avoid introducing overt magic use in the game.
At this point, I am skeptical as to what Turbine POSTS has any relevance to what Turbine actualy DOES over the long term.
In other words Turbine can't answer those questions by SPEAKING only by DOING.
Hmm. Might be getting somewhere here. Are you saying things should only be judged when they are actually DONE?
So what's up with all the doomcriers in this thread then?
DB
Maybe if you had high lighted the part of Grumpys post about 'no plans for overt magic' and' no plans for F2P' you would understand better what is up with the "doomcriers".
No difference. I did not care when they said "no plans for F2P", and I do not care now, since it is still not implemented. I will wait and see how it turns out, and if they ruin the game, I will yell. Until then, it's only paranoia, nothing else.
DB
You may be right Donnie but with two lies in the bank, the history of what becomes of games after a corporate takeover and what my experience has been with F2P im going with my paranoid instincts on this one. Nothing anyone says here is written in stone but its always good to hear different points of view.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
You claim to have 'the facts' but what you really have is marketing bullet points that Turbine has provided to those who are gullible enough to believe them. If you've followed these games for any length of time (or any kind of business really), you know that anything a game developer says should be taken with a grain of salt.
Apparently, all you have to do to get some to believe you is draw up bullet points (aka facts) on a website. No wonder the world is in financial ruins. (Too bad that "financial ruins" has nothing to do with this topic.)
The comparison of subscription plans, provided by Turbine, of the new hybrid model for LoTRO do exist in reality and must be upheld. Therefore, it is a fact. And, I use it to base it on my belief of what could happen.
And it will be concrete for all eternity and never change? We shall see about that one.
And, here you are attempting to put words into my mouth. I never claimed that it is concrete. However, for something to be a fact (their comparison of subscription plans) it is not required to be never-changing. If it does change, then my assessment will change. Again, I'm using facts to base my opinion about this subject rather than assumptions.
The only "fact" that you've got is that a document produced by Turbine exists. That's great, but it doesn't actually mean much in terms of the arguement that you were trying to forward. For example, during the Gulf War, the official Iraqi millitary spokesman claimed that there were no American forces inside Iraq....even as U.S. tanks were approaching his broadcast position.... That the Iraqi spokesman issued that statement is a "fact" but it didn't really have much factual bearing on the question of whether U.S. forces were in the country or not.
We don't actualy care that Turbine published a document. We care about how Turbines move will affect our game-play experience. That is the question at issue here. The content of Turbines document is so far from determinative of that it's hardly worth mentioning. But in examining that question lets look at some issues...
- Is Turbines published plan indicative of the plan that will ACTUALY be put in place when F2P goes live? We don't actualy know this, since right now it's a PROPOSED plan and the F2P is just entering beta. If you have experience as a gamer...or on the development side of things you know that ALOT of things are subject to change during beta as the Dev works out and tests implimentation details.
- Is Turbines published plan subject to rapid and drastic revision? A reasonable person only affords a claim or statement as much weight as the organization which is making that claim is likely to stand by it. Developers in general and Turbine in specific has a history of claiming one thing and then doing another in a short period of time. We've even provided examples of such statements by official Turbine spokespeople about the use of magic in the game or whether the game would go f2p. Whether such statements were intentionaly misleading or simply due to Turbine having no stability in terms of management direction is pretty much academic. The simple fact is that Turbine has already proven that it's statements don't carry much weight in terms of how predictive they are of what will actually happen in a few months time. Simply put, if a company states X and then does Y 3 months down the road.....when the company then claims Z, only a very foolish person would put much stock in Z actually happening.
- Finally even IF the published plan is accurate and set in stone, it doesn't provide much insight as to how existing subscribers game-play experience will be affected by the F2P move going forward. It covers only a limited number of specific game play aspects that currently exist in the game. It doesn't answer questions like:
. What items will be in the cash shop?
.To what degree will a VIP players game-play experience be adversely effected if the don't puchase those items?
. How much buying power will the 500 TP that VIP's get each month represent in terms of said items?
. What about new systems? If Turbine adds in another system like Legendary Items into the game will VIP's get it for free or will we have to purchase it in the cash shop?
. What about "fun/fluff" items like outfits and fireworks and festival stuff? Previously those were all included in the price of our monthly subs. Will VIP's get equivalent access to those things going forward or will we have to purchase them in the cash shop?
. In the past, content expansions like Forochel were included in our monthly subscription price. Will VIP's continue to get free access (including quests) to similar content expansions in future or will we have to pay for them in the cash shop?
. What about new races/classes/skirmishes, etc? They have listed that we get access to the ones we currently own. What will be the cost of accessing the new ones (for VIP's) when/if they are put in?
. To what degree will Turbine work on improving the game systems and content that are included as part of the base VIP package (as they have in the past) as opposed to simply putting in more items in the cash shop?
. How will the new influx of F2P players effect the existing player community in LOTRO, which is a big part of the attraction of the game for many current subscribers?
. How will the influx of F2P effect the technical aspects of the player experience....Like server lag and client resource requirements?
. How will advertisements for the cash shop be implimented. Will they occur in game? How disruptive to game play will they be?
. To what degree will VIP's be able to ignore the existance of the cash shop in thier regular game-play and just immerse themselves in the game-play experience?
The answer to these questions and others like them will determine whether the move has relatively little effect on the play experience of existing subscribers or whether it totaly trashes it. Yet there is no real info available as to what the answers might be .... It's possible that Turbine doesn't really have a clear feeling about the answers themselves yet. Yet the very move to the F2P/Hybrid model raises complications that simply DON'T EXIST in the current model. Furthermore DDO is only of limited use in predicting the answers to most of these...since it's an entirely different game, with entirely different mechanics and architecture and entirely different user communities. It's kinda like trying to say that a V4 engine will work well in a Chevy Tahoe because it worked well in a Volkswagon Beetle.
That might actualy mean something if those very same Turbine posters hadn't posted in those very same forums that Turbine had no plans to go F2P and that it would avoid introducing overt magic use in the game.
At this point, I am skeptical as to what Turbine POSTS has any relevance to what Turbine actualy DOES over the long term.
In other words Turbine can't answer those questions by SPEAKING only by DOING.
Well in the case of your first point that could very well have been true at the time , but seeing the potential that switching to F2P had based on the success of DDO, not only for increasing revenues but for filling up the all but empty starter zones and KEEPING them full I can see why their position changed. One of the most significant factors with regards to sub levels in an MMO is churn. In other words the rate at which older players leave and new ones join. One of the beauties of going to a hybrid F2P model is that you can slow down the churn rate significantly and even end up gaining back subs due to the simple fact that when you stop subbing you are still able to play the game, albeit in a somewhat restricted fashion.
As for your second point. I'm sure they looked at all the angles regarding overt magic in the game as the lore doesn't really represent magic in that way, but I don't see any other way they could have gone. In the end LOTRO is a game and they need to provide a balanced mix of classes to provide players with enough choices to fit their playstyles. I mean you can only have so many melee classes before they start to become redundant. I think Turbine has done an excellent job in designing classes that are unique will still largely remaining close to game lore.
You claim to have 'the facts' but what you really have is marketing bullet points that Turbine has provided to those who are gullible enough to believe them. If you've followed these games for any length of time (or any kind of business really), you know that anything a game developer says should be taken with a grain of salt.
Apparently, all you have to do to get some to believe you is draw up bullet points (aka facts) on a website. No wonder the world is in financial ruins. (Too bad that "financial ruins" has nothing to do with this topic.)
The comparison of subscription plans, provided by Turbine, of the new hybrid model for LoTRO do exist in reality and must be upheld. Therefore, it is a fact. And, I use it to base it on my belief of what could happen.
And it will be concrete for all eternity and never change? We shall see about that one.
And, here you are attempting to put words into my mouth. I never claimed that it is concrete. However, for something to be a fact (their comparison of subscription plans) it is not required to be never-changing. If it does change, then my assessment will change. Again, I'm using facts to base my opinion about this subject rather than assumptions.
The only "fact" that you've got is that a document produced by Turbine exists. That's great, but it doesn't actually mean much in terms of the arguement that you were trying to forward. For example, during the Gulf War, the official Iraqi millitary spokesman claimed that there were no American forces inside Iraq....even as U.S. tanks were approaching his broadcast position.... That the Iraqi spokesman issued that statement is a "fact" but it didn't really have much factual bearing on the question of whether U.S. forces were in the country or not.
We don't actualy care that Turbine published a document. We care about how Turbines move will affect our game-play experience. That is the question at issue here. The content of Turbines document is so far from determinative of that it's hardly worth mentioning. But in examining that question lets look at some issues...
- Is Turbines published plan indicative of the plan that will ACTUALY be put in place when F2P goes live? We don't actualy know this, since right now it's a PROPOSED plan and the F2P is just entering beta. If you have experience as a gamer...or on the development side of things you know that ALOT of things are subject to change during beta as the Dev works out and tests implimentation details.
- Is Turbines published plan subject to rapid and drastic revision? A reasonable person only affords a claim or statement as much weight as the organization which is making that claim is likely to stand by it. Developers in general and Turbine in specific has a history of claiming one thing and then doing another in a short period of time. We've even provided examples of such statements by official Turbine spokespeople about the use of magic in the game or whether the game would go f2p. Whether such statements were intentionaly misleading or simply due to Turbine having no stability in terms of management direction is pretty much academic. The simple fact is that Turbine has already proven that it's statements don't carry much weight in terms of how predictive they are of what will actually happen in a few months time. Simply put, if a company states X and then does Y 3 months down the road.....when the company then claims Z, only a very foolish person would put much stock in Z actually happening.
- Finally even IF the published plan is accurate and set in stone, it doesn't provide much insight as to how existing subscribers game-play experience will be affected by the F2P move going forward. It covers only a limited number of specific game play aspects that currently exist in the game. It doesn't answer questions like:
. What items will be in the cash shop?
.To what degree will a VIP players game-play experience be adversely effected if the don't puchase those items?
. How much buying power will the 500 TP that VIP's get each month represent in terms of said items?
. What about new systems? If Turbine adds in another system like Legendary Items into the game will VIP's get it for free or will we have to purchase it in the cash shop?
. What about "fun/fluff" items like outfits and fireworks and festival stuff? Previously those were all included in the price of our monthly subs. Will VIP's get equivalent access to those things going forward or will we have to purchase them in the cash shop?
. In the past, content expansions like Forochel were included in our monthly subscription price. Will VIP's continue to get free access (including quests) to similar content expansions in future or will we have to pay for them in the cash shop?
. What about new races/classes/skirmishes, etc? They have listed that we get access to the ones we currently own. What will be the cost of accessing the new ones (for VIP's) when/if they are put in?
. To what degree will Turbine work on improving the game systems and content that are included as part of the base VIP package (as they have in the past) as opposed to simply putting in more items in the cash shop?
. How will the new influx of F2P players effect the existing player community in LOTRO, which is a big part of the attraction of the game for many current subscribers?
. How will the influx of F2P effect the technical aspects of the player experience....Like server lag and client resource requirements?
. How will advertisements for the cash shop be implimented. Will they occur in game? How disruptive to game play will they be?
. To what degree will VIP's be able to ignore the existance of the cash shop in thier regular game-play and just immerse themselves in the game-play experience?
The answer to these questions and others like them will determine whether the move has relatively little effect on the play experience of existing subscribers or whether it totaly trashes it. Yet there is no real info available as to what the answers might be .... It's possible that Turbine doesn't really have a clear feeling about the answers themselves yet. Yet the very move to the F2P/Hybrid model raises complications that simply DON'T EXIST in the current model. Furthermore DDO is only of limited use in predicting the answers to most of these...since it's an entirely different game, with entirely different mechanics and architecture and entirely different user communities. It's kinda like trying to say that a V4 engine will work well in a Chevy Tahoe because it worked well in a Volkswagon Beetle.
That might actualy mean something if those very same Turbine posters hadn't posted in those very same forums that Turbine had no plans to go F2P and that it would avoid introducing overt magic use in the game.
At this point, I am skeptical as to what Turbine POSTS has any relevance to what Turbine actualy DOES over the long term.
In other words Turbine can't answer those questions by SPEAKING only by DOING.
Well in the case of your first point that could very well have been true at the time , but seeing the potential that switching to F2P had based on the success of DDO, not only for increasing revenues but for filling up the all but empty starter zones and KEEPING them full I can see why their position changed. One of the most significant factors with regards to sub levels in an MMO is churn. In other words the rate at which older players leave and new ones join. One of the beauties of going to a hybrid F2P model is that you can slow down the churn rate significantly and even end up gaining back subs due to the simple fact that when you stop subbing you are still able to play the game, albeit in a somewhat restricted fashion.
As for your second point. I'm sure they looked at all the angles regarding overt magic in the game as the lore doesn't really represent magic in that way, but I don't see any other way they could have gone. In the end LOTRO is a game and they need to provide a balanced mix of classes to provide players with enough choices to fit their playstyles. I mean you can only have so many melee classes before they start to become redundant. I think Turbine has done an excellent job in designing classes that are unique will still largely remaining close to game lore.
I'm not saying they may not have had good reasons for doing what they did. That's an entirely seperate debate. However if you repeatedly say one thing and then end up doing another, the next time you say something you can't really expect people to have much confidence that you'll actualy stick with it.
I'm not saying they may not have had good reasons for doing what they did. That's an entirely seperate debate. However if you repeatedly say one thing and then end up doing another, the next time you say something you can't really expect people to have much confidence that you'll actualy stick with it.
Gamers seem to choose what they want to believe rather than what is most likely. Those buying lifetime subs to games pre launch and those on the other side screaming fail of a certain game pre launch are both examples of people thinking with their hearts instead of their heads. I have no idea what Turbine/Warner Bros. will do with the F2P version of LOTRO but if one pays attention to history, one can come up with a likely scenario. I do understand why magic users were put into the game even going against LOTR lore but the fact that they said they wouldnt and then did comes under the heading of a lie in my book. The "we have no plans" line is one not exclusive to game companies. When any business uses this terminalogy its usually a good time to throw up the red flag. Ive heard it used twice by Turbine. "We have no plans to go F2P with LOTRO" then after the F2P announcment a Turbine facebook spokesman said " we have no plans to undermine crafting" in reply to what possible crafted items would be available in the CS. Appearance gear is how I skilled up tayloring and if appearance items are offered in the CS, which are pretty standard CS items, would not that take something that could have been given to crafters? So yes, like you Mel, I dont believe anything Turbine says at this point.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
I'm not saying they may not have had good reasons for doing what they did. That's an entirely seperate debate. However if you repeatedly say one thing and then end up doing another, the next time you say something you can't really expect people to have much confidence that you'll actualy stick with it.
Gamers seem to choose what they want to believe rather than what is most likely. Those buying lifetime subs to games pre launch and those on the other side screaming fail of a certain game pre launch are both examples of people thinking with their hearts instead of their heads. I have no idea what Turbine/Warner Bros. will do with the F2P version of LOTRO but if one pays attention to history, one can come up with a likely scenario. I do understand why magic users were put into the game even going against LOTR lore but the fact that they said they wouldnt and then did comes under the heading of a lie in my book. The "we have no plans" line is one not exclusive to game companies. When any business uses this terminalogy its usually a good time to throw up the red flag. Ive heard it used twice by Turbine. "We have no plans to go F2P with LOTRO" then after the F2P announcment a Turbine facebook spokesman said " we have no plans to undermine crafting" in reply to what possible crafted items would be available in the CS. Appearance gear is how I skilled up tayloring and if appearance items are offered in the CS, which are pretty standard CS items, would not that take something that could have been given to crafters? So yes, like you Mel, I dont believe anything Turbine says at this point.
Well crafting needs a major overhaul in general but I see your point. But they have also introduced the crafting skirmish rewards like bult refine and the recipies that allow you to basicaly craft items meant exclusively for skill ups too so adding cosmetic items to the LOTRO store is offset somewhat by that for those that just want to move up the crafting tiers. I think as long as they are not putting cosmetic items into the LOTRO store that tailors can already craft that is not too bad. Also I hope that they don't make the festival cosmetic items available for purchase either as I think they should stay exclusive to those areas too.
Comments
As a DDO player and forum reader I don't think you've presented the situation very well.
Yes they are changing how Two Handed Fighting is handled ..... because there is a bad lag problem on the end game side of the house and their testing seems to point at that being the problem. Will it be a nerf from what they have now? Yes. Will it fix the lag problem? I think all are hoping it will and that includes the players. As far as respecing, you can get that stone via loot drops too. It doesn't have to be purchased and considering the number of players that have TR'd anyway already, (no matter how they are getting respec items) I'm guessing it's pretty much not a biggie, just like changing your profession in SWG; you max out, you change and try something new.
The only 'pretty bad' thing I've really seen on the forums concerning Update 5 seems to be with the level of the latest adventure pack. It's aimed at low level characters, which on the face of it sounds bad, except that from a demographic's point of view marketing to the larger player base does make sense and of the last 2 updates one was aimed at the middle level players and the last at the high level players so now doing a low level also makes sense. What doesn't is the fact that low levels have more to do already and aiming the next few at the high levels would have been nice (even though I'm one of those low levels looking forward to the new pack!).
Any game, any update / patch ends up nerfing someone's favorite class. You either play through it, re-roll, change professions (a la SWG) or in DDO's case you TR. Doesn't matter if it's a P2p, F2p or Hybrid payment model.
SWG (pre-cu) - AoC (pre-f2p) - PotBS (pre-boarder) - DDO - LotRO (pre-f2p) - STO (pre-f2p) - GnH (beta tester) - SWTOR - Neverwinter
You may be right Donnie but with two lies in the bank, the history of what becomes of games after a corporate takeover and what my experience has been with F2P im going with my paranoid instincts on this one. Nothing anyone says here is written in stone but its always good to hear different points of view.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
Well in the case of your first point that could very well have been true at the time , but seeing the potential that switching to F2P had based on the success of DDO, not only for increasing revenues but for filling up the all but empty starter zones and KEEPING them full I can see why their position changed. One of the most significant factors with regards to sub levels in an MMO is churn. In other words the rate at which older players leave and new ones join. One of the beauties of going to a hybrid F2P model is that you can slow down the churn rate significantly and even end up gaining back subs due to the simple fact that when you stop subbing you are still able to play the game, albeit in a somewhat restricted fashion.
As for your second point. I'm sure they looked at all the angles regarding overt magic in the game as the lore doesn't really represent magic in that way, but I don't see any other way they could have gone. In the end LOTRO is a game and they need to provide a balanced mix of classes to provide players with enough choices to fit their playstyles. I mean you can only have so many melee classes before they start to become redundant. I think Turbine has done an excellent job in designing classes that are unique will still largely remaining close to game lore.
I'm not saying they may not have had good reasons for doing what they did. That's an entirely seperate debate. However if you repeatedly say one thing and then end up doing another, the next time you say something you can't really expect people to have much confidence that you'll actualy stick with it.
Gamers seem to choose what they want to believe rather than what is most likely. Those buying lifetime subs to games pre launch and those on the other side screaming fail of a certain game pre launch are both examples of people thinking with their hearts instead of their heads. I have no idea what Turbine/Warner Bros. will do with the F2P version of LOTRO but if one pays attention to history, one can come up with a likely scenario. I do understand why magic users were put into the game even going against LOTR lore but the fact that they said they wouldnt and then did comes under the heading of a lie in my book. The "we have no plans" line is one not exclusive to game companies. When any business uses this terminalogy its usually a good time to throw up the red flag. Ive heard it used twice by Turbine. "We have no plans to go F2P with LOTRO" then after the F2P announcment a Turbine facebook spokesman said " we have no plans to undermine crafting" in reply to what possible crafted items would be available in the CS. Appearance gear is how I skilled up tayloring and if appearance items are offered in the CS, which are pretty standard CS items, would not that take something that could have been given to crafters? So yes, like you Mel, I dont believe anything Turbine says at this point.
WOW isnt great because it has 12 million players. WOW has 12 million players because its great.
Well crafting needs a major overhaul in general but I see your point. But they have also introduced the crafting skirmish rewards like bult refine and the recipies that allow you to basicaly craft items meant exclusively for skill ups too so adding cosmetic items to the LOTRO store is offset somewhat by that for those that just want to move up the crafting tiers. I think as long as they are not putting cosmetic items into the LOTRO store that tailors can already craft that is not too bad. Also I hope that they don't make the festival cosmetic items available for purchase either as I think they should stay exclusive to those areas too.