Right now, it's like you can play a F2P game with an odious cash shop, or you can pay a P2P subscription for quality. GW was middle ground with a B2P model, but it didn't match WoW in terms of "the MMO experience." So again, people say you need to pay the subscription for the quality. GW didn't change anything.
As long as there are people willing to pay the sub, there will be P2P games. They're the best model for a developer. Even a modest subscription base can generate a huge stream of revenue over time.
But until people stop paying subscriptions, until people convince their friends not to pay subscriptions, until people convince the casual masses that play WoW to stop paying subscriptions, that kind of change is not going to happen.
After all, P2P is a barrier to entry for a lot of people. Players don't want to have two subscriptions at once, so many probably won't ever leave WoW to try another game. This makes it difficult for games to "win" subscriptions from WoW. B2P though....I think a lot of WoW players will at least try GW2, and in trying it, may be won over completely.
I think P2P MMOs would be under greater competition from innovations in online multiplayer gaming of other genres anyway whether or not B2P is employed, but certainly B2P is opening up the market^ and that should raise the standards expected from P2P business models without falling back to F2P which are "..." !!
But players who are already happy with their P2P MMO will likely continue to play these at the same time as having the CHOICE to play and pay for GW2.
It's more about the P2P MMOs that come out after GW2 that the competition will be more intense because they are not already ESTABLISHED.
GW2 will probably feel different to play to a lot of P2P MMOs also so the P2P model still is viable and especially strong P2P MMOs will continue to do well (hopefully TOR eg).
I personally believe that GW2 will cure the world of cancer and starvation.
Therefore it may threaten the whole drug- and grocery industries.
I also heard it may go back in time and kill Hitler in 1938. There is not much basis for this, however.
I don't really see why it's so hard to believe that GW2 may threaten the P2P model if it's successful. You act as if a payment model for MMORPGs (which are rather young) has the constancy of death or taxes.
As technology improves, firms are able to offer the same service at less cost, and sometimes they choose to lower the price of their service so they gain a competitive advantage over competing firms. You can see this time and time again in any technology industry. I think the GW2 phenomenon is the same thing.
The cost of bandwidth and other maintenance costs has gone down in recent years and this has allowed ArenaNet to offer the MMORPG service at less cost. They have decided to try to gain a competitive advantage by offering their game as B2P as opposed to P2P.
All I'm saying is that if I were an executive at a P2P MMORPG firm, especially one that is currently developing a P2P MMORPG, I would be concerned. The reason I would be concerned is because another firm is planning to offer a product that will likely be just as high quality as mine (if not higher), and appeal to similar market segments at a lower price. Now, I'm forced to either make my game better than GW2 to justify the price, lower my price, or go with the game as is and pray that it does well.
It's not magic, it's not fanboyism, it's just good business sense.
It's not magic, it's not fanboyism, it's just good business sense.
In the end it just comes down to can this company keep up with the same level of service as the P2P companies do.
In the "worst case" P2P companies have to keep putting more resources to the game after it has been released to justify the subscription fees. It'll still be worth aiming for because the profits will be higher, they just have to make more effort.
Sounds good, but not threatening in the slightest. Subs make most money, they aren't going anywhere.
The poor pharmaceutical companies however...
Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
Here wake up call , running 250+ persistant servers without subscription , IF GW2 is so successfull as people like to predict .
Cost HOW MUCH MONTHLY ?
Not even including the cost of operators and other back bone people .
I love it everytime a F2P says something like this , but atleast F2P has cash shops .
What will GW2 do to operate the cost , lets say they sell 10 Million copies at 60 a piece , is 600 million .
How much does it cost to operate 250+ server a year , and giving customer support thats needed.
Or is it you buy and playing experience is not aduquete lag is too much , they say sorry .
Too bad bugger off , Now to even make a topic like that you need to know economics .
Yes some people live in dreamworlds where everything is Free , and they dont pay there internet monthly .
Pay there food monthly ,work for a measy 50 a day . well dont see GW2 having 250 servers to dominate the market .
Means at least 20-30 operators that needs to be paid monthly !!!
First of all, we don't know how many server they will have running, saying 250+ is saying a number out of nowhere thus destroying all your mathematics.
2nd, to answer your doubts: cash shop for transmutation stones, fashionables and account services. PLUS releasing expantions 1-2x each year, and those expansions will have to be really good to sell as many as the original has, and attract even more people.
3rd, since it's B2P, a lot of P2P clients will buy it too because they can play a 2nd great game without paying 2 games monthly, thus increasing considerably the number of clients and the money they get from them. And it's a great payment model to offer in a present for x-mas or birthday, because the owner will be happy, will try the game without thinking about monthly fees and the probability to get interested in the game is higher (a potencial client, after all the game was already bought).
4th, it will work in computers with lower requirements than most games releasing from now on, which means, even more clients and more money.
Here wake up call , running 250+ persistant servers without subscription , IF GW2 is so successfull as people like to predict .
Cost HOW MUCH MONTHLY ?
Not even including the cost of operators and other back bone people .
I love it everytime a F2P says something like this , but atleast F2P has cash shops .
What will GW2 do to operate the cost , lets say they sell 10 Million copies at 60 a piece , is 600 million .
How much does it cost to operate 250+ server a year , and giving customer support thats needed.
Or is it you buy and playing experience is not aduquete lag is too much , they say sorry .
Too bad bugger off , Now to even make a topic like that you need to know economics .
Yes some people live in dreamworlds where everything is Free , and they dont pay there internet monthly .
Pay there food monthly ,work for a measy 50 a day . well dont see GW2 having 250 servers to dominate the market .
Means at least 20-30 operators that needs to be paid monthly !!!
First of all, we don't know how many server they will have running, saying 250+ is saying a number out of nowhere thus destroying all your mathematics.
2nd, to answer your doubts: cash shop for transmutation stones, fashionables and account services. PLUS releasing expantions 1-2x each year, and those expansions will have to be really good to sell as many as the original has, and attract even more people.
3rd, since it's B2P, a lot of P2P clients will buy it too because they can play a 2nd great game without paying 2 games monthly, thus increasing considerably the number of clients and the money they get from them. And it's a great payment model to offer in a present for x-mas or birthday, because the owner will be happy, will try the game without thinking about monthly fees and the probability to get interested in the game is higher (a potencial client, after all the game was already bought).
4th, it will work in computers with lower requirements than most games releasing from now on, which means, even more clients and more money.
5th and last: tested with GW1!
250+ servers is taken from WOW population OF NA and EUROPE !!!
that constitute to only ..... 8 million subscribers !!!! (ok max out 7 million maybe players)
So to BEAT the whole market of F2P or P2P you need atleast those numbers ..
2nd Well cash shops can manage a income to keep the servers open , how does guildwar want to do after selling the box ?
Cause unlike Guildwar 1 this time they offer PERSISTANT servers for PVE .
So to sell the 1-2 expansions each year , they have to put in CUSTOMER SUPPORT !! or else i wont buy the expansions .
If my playtime is less then satisfactory . and then you have people who refuse to buy expansions cause of the attitude.
I dont need more !!
So you need to force or in marketing terms encourage them .
3rd yes thats why i said , take 10 million (grossly over excaggerated number of boxes sold) minus development time.
Minus cut here and cut there (main profit doesn´t go to the company unless they do digital downloads) , marketing campgain . pay cuts and other services 600 million is a lot .
Still 12 months of operation is how much , to BEAT the whole market or even threatening !!
So honestly to say you going to beat the whole market or even threaten it , like OP and fans claim .
You need a whole backbone thats VERY VERY expensive .
4 Ah so state of the art graphics are already gone , cause of requirements to run onto lower end spectrums .
So much GW looks beter then anything else out there .
Cause it has to adapt to a wide major market to beat or even threaten F2P / P2P market .
Server costs are proportional. If you need 250 servers for 12 million subscribers, that's ~ 50k players per server. If the game sells 500k copies, they need 10 servers. If it sells 1M, they need 20 servers, etc. Their operating costs will be proportional to their player base. If they can keep 10 servers running from the proceeds from 500k sales, they can keep 20 servers running from 1M sales, or really any number with any number. It should be pretty obvious that they didn't make a business plan and then not think about how they were going to pay to keep the servers running, say "whoops, our bad" and fold the company.
Besides, figuring out how you're going to keep 250 servers running to support your 12 million person playerbase? Sounds to me like one of those good problems to have.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Its not about the business plan , or that GW2 will sell .
Its about waking up those fans that want to praise the stuff into the impossible .
Its about teaching or educating the youth , that hype is OK but hype only goes so far .
I have trust GW2 will sell , but people are hyping it up way way too much .
That they set themselfs for a big FALL .
If even 1 small feature is not implemented people already flock to the naysayer .
This post here , states what they are feeling .
GW2 MUST SUCCEED and HAS TO SUCCEED !!
Now i know the feeling have the same with SWTOR , but unlike them i would say if SWTOR fails too bad .
I wont cry or go nerdrage , and all indication of SWTOR is thatsthe kind of people who going to buy it .
While for GW2 people like having almost impossible dreams and ideals for it .
Its impossible GW2 will replace a P2P MMO , the back bone of NCSOFT is good , but they fired way way too many good people.
And those are very hard to replace . cause they left in a grudge .
You have a point. And frankly do I think many of the people who hype the game havn't realized what kind of a game it is. For one thing is the game unlike Wow not gear based. The endgame is not about collecting better and better gear. There is no raiding (but open world bosses that can take a lot of people to bring down).
I am looking forward to the game but I am a fan of GW, I don't think that we will be disappointed but I think many players who seen a few vids and read a little about the game will be. The game differs a lot from the usual MMOs and if you expect a Wow with better graphics and no monthly fees you'll get a nasty surprise.
I don't worry so much about them canning features however, they are careful to only present features that already work.
Still, it might be so that the game isn't fun enough to play in the long run for me as well, only time can tell that.
I, too, used to believe that GW2 would challenge the subscription model (because I have yet to see what a subscription game can offer me, a strapped-for-time adult gamer, that Guild Wars doesn't, or that Guild Wars 2 doesn't promise), but over the months of reading oppositions to the B2P model I realize this will never happen.
The subscription model will always be popular not because subscription games are inherently superior due to their model (otherwise subscription games like LOTRO and EQ2 would not be offering F2P options), and not because they've made the case that subscription games cost more (ArenaNet has made a good argument for why that isn't the case).
No, it will always be popular because there will always be consumers who want to be able to "fire and forget", so to speak. They don't want to itemize what they're getting, and they don't feel the need to squeeze every bit of value out of every penny they spend. It has little to do with wealth (many of us make at least the cost of a monthly subscription in an hour, no?) and more to do with simply knowing you're "covered." That's more valuable to some people than for others. For me, I cringe each night that I don't log on to a subscription game, thinking of it as wasted money, and I cherish "owning" my characters and the areas I buy, even if I don't have access to the entire game (because I don't need it).
This is not an inferior option, but it IS an option.
I personally believe that GW2 will cure the world of cancer and starvation.
Therefore it may threaten the whole drug- and grocery industries.
I also heard it may go back in time and kill Hitler in 1938. There is not much basis for this, however.
I don't really see why it's so hard to believe that GW2 may threaten the P2P model if it's successful. You act as if a payment model for MMORPGs (which are rather young) has the constancy of death or taxes.
As technology improves, firms are able to offer the same service at less cost, and sometimes they choose to lower the price of their service so they gain a competitive advantage over competing firms. You can see this time and time again in any technology industry. I think the GW2 phenomenon is the same thing.
The cost of bandwidth and other maintenance costs has gone down in recent years and this has allowed ArenaNet to offer the MMORPG service at less cost. They have decided to try to gain a competitive advantage by offering their game as B2P as opposed to P2P.
All I'm saying is that if I were an executive at a P2P MMORPG firm, especially one that is currently developing a P2P MMORPG, I would be concerned. The reason I would be concerned is because another firm is planning to offer a product that will likely be just as high quality as mine (if not higher), and appeal to similar market segments at a lower price. Now, I'm forced to either make my game better than GW2 to justify the price, lower my price, or go with the game as is and pray that it does well.
It's not magic, it's not fanboyism, it's just good business sense.
That sounds like a good argukment for an AAA MMORPG that is $7.95 a month plus the box.
Now THAT sounds like a game changer. Setting the new monthly fee lower than the standard 14.95.
GW2 won't change the subscription model any more than current F2P titles like LotRO and DDO have already changed it. Why? Because as the OP said, "GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG." The keyword there, of course, being "more." While we'll be given a largely persistent world to play around in, I'm not sure we can expect the same depth and breadth of content in GW2 that we see in a subscription-based MMORPG.
I know the popular belief amongst this site is that Anet is the only video game company around today that seems to truly care about their customer base and that companies that charge a monthly sub are simply trying to bleed money from their game's fanbase, but I believe this simply isn't the case. Anet is simply as much about the dollars as anyone else, so I believe we'll see new content released on about the same schedule as the original GW, perhaps more often if they sell content packs through the item shop. In terms of gameplay, again, I don't look to see much outside of killing and looting, just like GW1. There will be greater variety in item appearances, but how does that compare to subscription based MMORPGs? No one really knows at this point.
What I do know is that GW1 didn't not charge a monthly fee because it was instanced. GW1 did not charge a monthly fee because it really wasn't deserving of one, and I think GW2 will be the same way.
GW2 won't change the subscription model any more than current F2P titles like LotRO and DDO have already changed it. Why? Because as the OP said, "GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG." The keyword there, of course, being "more." While we'll be given a largely persistent world to play around in, I'm not sure we can expect the same depth and breadth of content in GW2 that we see in a subscription-based MMORPG.
I know the popular belief amongst this site is that Anet is the only video game company around today that seems to truly care about their customer base and that companies that charge a monthly sub are simply trying to bleed money from their game's fanbase, but I believe this simply isn't the case. Anet is simply as much about the dollars as anyone else, so I believe we'll see new content released on about the same schedule as the original GW, perhaps more often if they sell content packs through the item shop. In terms of gameplay, again, I don't look to see much outside of killing and looting, just like GW1. There will be greater variety in item appearances, but how does that compare to subscription based MMORPGs? No one really knows at this point.
What I do know is that GW1 didn't not charge a monthly fee because it was instanced. GW1 did not charge a monthly fee because it really wasn't deserving of one, and I think GW2 will be the same way.
GW2 is offering the same kind of AAA MMO experience as a B2P that you normally get from a P2P. You could buy GW2 for $60, never pay another dollar ever, stuff the game in your closet for 5 years and I GUARANTEE that when you boot it up again, the servers will be running, the customer support will be there. There will be a vanity cash shop, but you'll be able to play the entire game, for years, without buying anything, unless you want to pay for whatever they're offering; bank slots, character slots, DLC, expansions, extra dungeons, extra storyline, whatever.
You can't even compare it to a failed P2P game that went to a F2P model just to survive. I've played LOTRO for free, I find it boring. I'm sure a lot of people did too, otherwise it wouldn't be trying this F2P model.
I believe that ArenaNet cares as much about the dollar as anybody. I think the dollar is all that matters. I have no illusions. They know WoW has a stranglehold on the subscription model, and that B2P is going to allow them to reach a larger audience and build positive word of mouth. They aren't following a F2P model of sucking you in and then making you pay if you want to be competitive. They don't want to suck you in with hype so that you buy the box and turn a quick profit while you find out the game actually sucks. They want to put out the best product they can, charge a fair price for it, and hope that you like it enough to continue playing and buying their expansions/DLCs/whatever the next iteration of their game is.
I think ArenaNet is treating me fairly, and I want to reward that. I could just play Vindictus or whatever F2P thing until the next game comes out. Instead, I'm buying GW expansions that I didn't buy the first time. I'm buying their books. I'm planning on buying 2 extra copies of GW2 and giving them to members of my family. Games that charge $15 a month don't get that kind of support from me.
And finally, can people please stop with the "I don't look to see much outside of killing and looting, just like GW1"? This is radically different gameplay from GW1, from WoW, from everything. There's no quests, instead they have dynamic events that run with or without players. You don't have to talk to NPCs as precursors to events. Events give you gold and karma so you can buy the rewards you want. Events scale depending on number of participating players. Everybody gets loot based on amount of participation. Outdoor raids that anybody can participate in. Griefing in PVE is impossible. Resource nodes are available to everyone. Each person has their own personal storyline. Choices made during character creation affect your story. Instanced section of town will show changes based on your choices in the story. There's no autoattack. Implied targeting. There's no holy trinity. You get half your skills at any time from your weapons. Everybody has a mandatory heal on their bar at all times. You can cast while moving. Projectiles can be dodged. You can block projectiles from hitting people behind you with a shield. Over 100 cross profession combos. People go downed before they die and can pop back up if they kill a mob. Anybody can rez anybody at any time (and be rewarded as participating for it). No death penalty unless you have to release to a graveyard. Dungeons have a story mode and an explorable mode. Dungeons have multiple paths. There are hidden events in corners of the world to reward explorers. People automatically scale down in level to the zone they're in. Or they can sidekick up to play with a higher level friend. Week long world vs world vs world battlegrounds. Battleground winners get a PVE buff for their world. Shooting gallery and other places in town to hang out at. Flat leveling curve. 400 dye colors. Being able to combine weapons to get the stats of one but the look of another (by purchasing one of those vanity cash shop items). You can even (for some reason) see on an iPad what your friends are doing in game.
All for no monthly fee. Now can you see why we think that this B2P game might threaten the P2P model?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it."-Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
I personally believe that GW2 will cure the world of cancer and starvation.
Therefore it may threaten the whole drug- and grocery industries.
I also heard it may go back in time and kill Hitler in 1938. There is not much basis for this, however.
I don't really see why it's so hard to believe that GW2 may threaten the P2P model if it's successful. You act as if a payment model for MMORPGs (which are rather young) has the constancy of death or taxes.
As technology improves, firms are able to offer the same service at less cost, and sometimes they choose to lower the price of their service so they gain a competitive advantage over competing firms. You can see this time and time again in any technology industry. I think the GW2 phenomenon is the same thing.
The cost of bandwidth and other maintenance costs has gone down in recent years and this has allowed ArenaNet to offer the MMORPG service at less cost. They have decided to try to gain a competitive advantage by offering their game as B2P as opposed to P2P.
All I'm saying is that if I were an executive at a P2P MMORPG firm, especially one that is currently developing a P2P MMORPG, I would be concerned. The reason I would be concerned is because another firm is planning to offer a product that will likely be just as high quality as mine (if not higher), and appeal to similar market segments at a lower price. Now, I'm forced to either make my game better than GW2 to justify the price, lower my price, or go with the game as is and pray that it does well.
It's not magic, it's not fanboyism, it's just good business sense.
That sounds like a good argukment for an AAA MMORPG that is $7.95 a month plus the box.
Now THAT sounds like a game changer. Setting the new monthly fee lower than the standard 14.95.
Yah it definitely would be a good argument for what you state, but it's also a good argument for B2P. B2P IS essentially a price reduction when compared to P2P, it's just distributing the price differently.
You may look at B2P and think that it's not a sustainable business model because the firm isn't getting that constant P2P income. However, when you look at revenue in terms of how much you make per customer, it paints a bit of a different picture. Here's an example...
Say there is a company developing an MMO and they are trying to decide on a pricing model. They estimate that with a P2P model, the average consumer will buy the box, stay subscribed for 6 months, and buy two ($30) expansions. This means that the VALUE of an average consumer is:
$60 + $15*6 + $30*2 = $210
Now say that the company estimates they will be able to sell their game to 3 million consumers with a P2P model, this means that the total estimated revenue of the game is: $210*3mil = $630 million.
Next, the same company considers a B2P model. Under this model the average consumer buys the box, and buys two ($45) expansions . This means the VALUE of the average consumer is:
$60 + $45*2 = $150
The company estimates that they will be able to sell their game to 6 million consumers with the B2P model, due to reaching consumers that would normally not puchase a P2P game. So the estimated total revenue of the game is: $150*6mil = $900 million.
Anyway, this is just a very simplified (no consideration of expense) example, but you can see where I'm going. Every consumer has a specific value to the firm, and they can likely estimate this value. It is possible that B2P will earn the firm more money than P2P due to mass appeal.
Promise this won't go too much further but it was just to prove a point.
1st link, 3rd post down grimm6th.
2nd link: well you saw that one, the point of the post was to say why i liked ToR, GW2 didn't really have a place in that. I understand the interest in the game, but that really wasn't the place for it.
Anyway thats the only reason. Person said they didn't really see any rampant fanboisism from GW2 and i posted a few links.
For good nature: i'll put this back on topic, or try to at least.
I feel that B2P will work well but i'm not sure it will have such an impact that it will replace the P2P model all together. Companies like consistent revenue. So I feel it will in that case it will continue to be so.
Isn't it terrible when another MMO game is mentioned in a thread that has nothing to do with it similarly to how SWTOR popped up in this thread which is specific to GW2 and it's business model.
It's bound to happen on these boards and there are fan(boys) of every game that will read a thread and be thinking of how that relates to the game they are hyped about.
Isn't it terrible when another MMO game is mentioned in a thread that has nothing to do with it similarly to how SWTOR popped up in this thread which is specific to GW2 and it's business model.
It's bound to happen on these boards and there are fan(boys) of every game that will read a thread and be thinking of how that relates to the game they are hyped about.
Did someone say TERA! Oh wait..... nvm
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
Yah it definitely would be a good argument for what you state, but it's also a good argument for B2P. B2P IS essentially a price reduction when compared to P2P, it's just distributing the price differently.
You may look at B2P and think that it's not a sustainable business model because the firm isn't getting that constant P2P income. However, when you look at revenue in terms of how much you make per customer, it paints a bit of a different picture. Here's an example...
Say there is a company developing an MMO and they are trying to decide on a pricing model. They estimate that with a P2P model, the average consumer will buy the box, stay subscribed for 6 months, and buy two ($30) expansions. This means that the VALUE of an average consumer is:
$60 + $15*6 + $30*2 = $210
Now say that the company estimates they will be able to sell their game to 3 million consumers with a P2P model, this means that the total estimated revenue of the game is: $210*3mil = $630 million.
Next, the same company considers a B2P model. Under this model the average consumer buys the box, and buys two ($45) expansions . This means the VALUE of the average consumer is:
$60 + $45*2 = $150
The company estimates that they will be able to sell their game to 6 million consumers with the B2P model, due to reaching consumers that would normally not puchase a P2P game. So the estimated total revenue of the game is: $150*6mil = $900 million.
Anyway, this is just a very simplified (no consideration of expense) example, but you can see where I'm going. Every consumer has a specific value to the firm, and they can likely estimate this valie. It is possible that B2P will earn the firm more many than P2P due to mass appeal.
Here wake up call , running 250+ persistant servers without subscription , IF GW2 is so successfull as people like to predict .
Cost HOW MUCH MONTHLY ?
Not even including the cost of operators and other back bone people .
I love it everytime a F2P says something like this , but atleast F2P has cash shops .
What will GW2 do to operate the cost , lets say they sell 10 Million copies at 60 a piece , is 600 million .
How much does it cost to operate 250+ server a year , and giving customer support thats needed.
Or is it you buy and playing experience is not aduquete lag is too much , they say sorry .
Too bad bugger off , Now to even make a topic like that you need to know economics .
Yes some people live in dreamworlds where everything is Free , and they dont pay there internet monthly .
Pay there food monthly ,work for a measy 50 a day . well dont see GW2 having 250 servers to dominate the market .
Means at least 20-30 operators that needs to be paid monthly !!!
You better let Anet know that they aren't charging enough money to support their game. Whether it's 1 million or 12 million the costs to the support the game will rise and fall with the retail sales. I'm guessing someone thought of that.
To clarify, I'm not saying GW2 can't be an AAA MMO. It has a good chance of being one.
I am just extremely skeptical that it will be replacing anything in the genre, or stealing subs from other games.
You can be certain it will steal subs from other games. I'm not saying it will necessarily be noticable per individual game, but there will be players jumping over. Every live mmo out right now has former, current and never-played GW players temporarily subbed using them as a "filler" of time until GW2's release. I've spoken with them in games, I've read the comments in chats and have read it many times in forums. In addition to that I've seen countless forum posts across gaming forums of people writing that they're going to be getting GW2, as either their sole game or as a secondary. If it's good enough not everyone will maintain their sub game. There truly aren't that many "heavy weights" out there in the genre. A "couple" going okay to strong, many hanging on by threads and a bunch of crud. GW2 is not coming out originally as a pvp-centric, lacking in pve, instanced game as was it's predecessor during it's start.
----------------
Anyone that questions ANet's abilities and dedication to putting out a quality product and maintaining it as well as any p2p game company is just telling me that they haven't experienced ANet long term. As a player of GW over its first three years (aka, when it was ANet's primary focus) and a player of multiple p2p games I have experience from both sides of the fence. ANet updated/patched as often as anyone and typically nearly bug free, and always quick to fix. My most recent p2p game got $15 a month for 18 months as it continually got worse and quality patches went months between. It's still live but I don't know how anyone can justify paying that company monthly. In other words, when comparing the models, the company and specific game come in to play.
Apart from what I've written, I don't have any illusions that ANet's business model will force much of a perceivable change to mmo's. I have little doubt they'll be successful with their approach, but others will have still have success with p2p too I'm sure.
Comments
IF this is true, I might have alook at it.
Make us care MORE about our faction & world pvp!
I think P2P MMOs would be under greater competition from innovations in online multiplayer gaming of other genres anyway whether or not B2P is employed, but certainly B2P is opening up the market^ and that should raise the standards expected from P2P business models without falling back to F2P which are "..." !!
But players who are already happy with their P2P MMO will likely continue to play these at the same time as having the CHOICE to play and pay for GW2.
It's more about the P2P MMOs that come out after GW2 that the competition will be more intense because they are not already ESTABLISHED.
GW2 will probably feel different to play to a lot of P2P MMOs also so the P2P model still is viable and especially strong P2P MMOs will continue to do well (hopefully TOR eg).
http://www.gdcvault.com/play/1014633/Classic-Game-Postmortem
Here wake up call , running 250+ persistant servers without subscription , IF GW2 is so successfull as people like to predict .
Cost HOW MUCH MONTHLY ?
Not even including the cost of operators and other back bone people .
I love it everytime a F2P says something like this , but atleast F2P has cash shops .
What will GW2 do to operate the cost , lets say they sell 10 Million copies at 60 a piece , is 600 million .
How much does it cost to operate 250+ server a year , and giving customer support thats needed.
Or is it you buy and playing experience is not aduquete lag is too much , they say sorry .
Too bad bugger off , Now to even make a topic like that you need to know economics .
Yes some people live in dreamworlds where everything is Free , and they dont pay there internet monthly .
Pay there food monthly ,work for a measy 50 a day . well dont see GW2 having 250 servers to dominate the market .
Means at least 20-30 operators that needs to be paid monthly !!!
I personally believe that GW2 will cure the world of cancer and starvation.
Therefore it may threaten the whole drug- and grocery industries.
I also heard it may go back in time and kill Hitler in 1938. There is not much basis for this, however.
I don't really see why it's so hard to believe that GW2 may threaten the P2P model if it's successful. You act as if a payment model for MMORPGs (which are rather young) has the constancy of death or taxes.
As technology improves, firms are able to offer the same service at less cost, and sometimes they choose to lower the price of their service so they gain a competitive advantage over competing firms. You can see this time and time again in any technology industry. I think the GW2 phenomenon is the same thing.
The cost of bandwidth and other maintenance costs has gone down in recent years and this has allowed ArenaNet to offer the MMORPG service at less cost. They have decided to try to gain a competitive advantage by offering their game as B2P as opposed to P2P.
All I'm saying is that if I were an executive at a P2P MMORPG firm, especially one that is currently developing a P2P MMORPG, I would be concerned. The reason I would be concerned is because another firm is planning to offer a product that will likely be just as high quality as mine (if not higher), and appeal to similar market segments at a lower price. Now, I'm forced to either make my game better than GW2 to justify the price, lower my price, or go with the game as is and pray that it does well.
It's not magic, it's not fanboyism, it's just good business sense.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
In the end it just comes down to can this company keep up with the same level of service as the P2P companies do.
In the "worst case" P2P companies have to keep putting more resources to the game after it has been released to justify the subscription fees. It'll still be worth aiming for because the profits will be higher, they just have to make more effort.
Sounds good, but not threatening in the slightest. Subs make most money, they aren't going anywhere.
The poor pharmaceutical companies however...
First of all, we don't know how many server they will have running, saying 250+ is saying a number out of nowhere thus destroying all your mathematics.
2nd, to answer your doubts: cash shop for transmutation stones, fashionables and account services. PLUS releasing expantions 1-2x each year, and those expansions will have to be really good to sell as many as the original has, and attract even more people.
3rd, since it's B2P, a lot of P2P clients will buy it too because they can play a 2nd great game without paying 2 games monthly, thus increasing considerably the number of clients and the money they get from them. And it's a great payment model to offer in a present for x-mas or birthday, because the owner will be happy, will try the game without thinking about monthly fees and the probability to get interested in the game is higher (a potencial client, after all the game was already bought).
4th, it will work in computers with lower requirements than most games releasing from now on, which means, even more clients and more money.
5th and last: tested with GW1!
250+ servers is taken from WOW population OF NA and EUROPE !!!
that constitute to only ..... 8 million subscribers !!!! (ok max out 7 million maybe players)
So to BEAT the whole market of F2P or P2P you need atleast those numbers ..
2nd Well cash shops can manage a income to keep the servers open , how does guildwar want to do after selling the box ?
Cause unlike Guildwar 1 this time they offer PERSISTANT servers for PVE .
So to sell the 1-2 expansions each year , they have to put in CUSTOMER SUPPORT !! or else i wont buy the expansions .
If my playtime is less then satisfactory . and then you have people who refuse to buy expansions cause of the attitude.
I dont need more !!
So you need to force or in marketing terms encourage them .
3rd yes thats why i said , take 10 million (grossly over excaggerated number of boxes sold) minus development time.
Minus cut here and cut there (main profit doesn´t go to the company unless they do digital downloads) , marketing campgain . pay cuts and other services 600 million is a lot .
Still 12 months of operation is how much , to BEAT the whole market or even threatening !!
So honestly to say you going to beat the whole market or even threaten it , like OP and fans claim .
You need a whole backbone thats VERY VERY expensive .
4 Ah so state of the art graphics are already gone , cause of requirements to run onto lower end spectrums .
So much GW looks beter then anything else out there .
Cause it has to adapt to a wide major market to beat or even threaten F2P / P2P market .
Server costs are proportional. If you need 250 servers for 12 million subscribers, that's ~ 50k players per server. If the game sells 500k copies, they need 10 servers. If it sells 1M, they need 20 servers, etc. Their operating costs will be proportional to their player base. If they can keep 10 servers running from the proceeds from 500k sales, they can keep 20 servers running from 1M sales, or really any number with any number. It should be pretty obvious that they didn't make a business plan and then not think about how they were going to pay to keep the servers running, say "whoops, our bad" and fold the company.
Besides, figuring out how you're going to keep 250 servers running to support your 12 million person playerbase? Sounds to me like one of those good problems to have.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Its not about the business plan , or that GW2 will sell .
Its about waking up those fans that want to praise the stuff into the impossible .
Its about teaching or educating the youth , that hype is OK but hype only goes so far .
I have trust GW2 will sell , but people are hyping it up way way too much .
That they set themselfs for a big FALL .
If even 1 small feature is not implemented people already flock to the naysayer .
This post here , states what they are feeling .
GW2 MUST SUCCEED and HAS TO SUCCEED !!
Now i know the feeling have the same with SWTOR , but unlike them i would say if SWTOR fails too bad .
I wont cry or go nerdrage , and all indication of SWTOR is thatsthe kind of people who going to buy it .
While for GW2 people like having almost impossible dreams and ideals for it .
Its impossible GW2 will replace a P2P MMO , the back bone of NCSOFT is good , but they fired way way too many good people.
And those are very hard to replace . cause they left in a grudge .
You have a point. And frankly do I think many of the people who hype the game havn't realized what kind of a game it is. For one thing is the game unlike Wow not gear based. The endgame is not about collecting better and better gear. There is no raiding (but open world bosses that can take a lot of people to bring down).
I am looking forward to the game but I am a fan of GW, I don't think that we will be disappointed but I think many players who seen a few vids and read a little about the game will be. The game differs a lot from the usual MMOs and if you expect a Wow with better graphics and no monthly fees you'll get a nasty surprise.
I don't worry so much about them canning features however, they are careful to only present features that already work.
Still, it might be so that the game isn't fun enough to play in the long run for me as well, only time can tell that.
Actually, the first GW sold just under 7 million boxes (4.5 million accounts) so it is not so impossible numbers.
I, too, used to believe that GW2 would challenge the subscription model (because I have yet to see what a subscription game can offer me, a strapped-for-time adult gamer, that Guild Wars doesn't, or that Guild Wars 2 doesn't promise), but over the months of reading oppositions to the B2P model I realize this will never happen.
The subscription model will always be popular not because subscription games are inherently superior due to their model (otherwise subscription games like LOTRO and EQ2 would not be offering F2P options), and not because they've made the case that subscription games cost more (ArenaNet has made a good argument for why that isn't the case).
No, it will always be popular because there will always be consumers who want to be able to "fire and forget", so to speak. They don't want to itemize what they're getting, and they don't feel the need to squeeze every bit of value out of every penny they spend. It has little to do with wealth (many of us make at least the cost of a monthly subscription in an hour, no?) and more to do with simply knowing you're "covered." That's more valuable to some people than for others. For me, I cringe each night that I don't log on to a subscription game, thinking of it as wasted money, and I cherish "owning" my characters and the areas I buy, even if I don't have access to the entire game (because I don't need it).
This is not an inferior option, but it IS an option.
Thats with different time setting , i am saying its 10 million on release ( a figure very hard to reach in the gaming industry)
You take over time the copies sold , in dustbin and other stuff , its still a sale even at half price .
Its on release thats what counts , so on release you expect it to sell 7.5 million ?
Then they beter prepare for 7.5 million players playing it !!
And maintaining the persistant servers for 7.5 million , thats roughly around 240 servers .
I know GW1 started off with 0.5 million , GW2 wont be that easy number entry , and tons more impatient people .
That sounds like a good argukment for an AAA MMORPG that is $7.95 a month plus the box.
Now THAT sounds like a game changer. Setting the new monthly fee lower than the standard 14.95.
GW2 won't change the subscription model any more than current F2P titles like LotRO and DDO have already changed it. Why? Because as the OP said, "GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG." The keyword there, of course, being "more." While we'll be given a largely persistent world to play around in, I'm not sure we can expect the same depth and breadth of content in GW2 that we see in a subscription-based MMORPG.
I know the popular belief amongst this site is that Anet is the only video game company around today that seems to truly care about their customer base and that companies that charge a monthly sub are simply trying to bleed money from their game's fanbase, but I believe this simply isn't the case. Anet is simply as much about the dollars as anyone else, so I believe we'll see new content released on about the same schedule as the original GW, perhaps more often if they sell content packs through the item shop. In terms of gameplay, again, I don't look to see much outside of killing and looting, just like GW1. There will be greater variety in item appearances, but how does that compare to subscription based MMORPGs? No one really knows at this point.
What I do know is that GW1 didn't not charge a monthly fee because it was instanced. GW1 did not charge a monthly fee because it really wasn't deserving of one, and I think GW2 will be the same way.
GW2 is offering the same kind of AAA MMO experience as a B2P that you normally get from a P2P. You could buy GW2 for $60, never pay another dollar ever, stuff the game in your closet for 5 years and I GUARANTEE that when you boot it up again, the servers will be running, the customer support will be there. There will be a vanity cash shop, but you'll be able to play the entire game, for years, without buying anything, unless you want to pay for whatever they're offering; bank slots, character slots, DLC, expansions, extra dungeons, extra storyline, whatever.
You can't even compare it to a failed P2P game that went to a F2P model just to survive. I've played LOTRO for free, I find it boring. I'm sure a lot of people did too, otherwise it wouldn't be trying this F2P model.
I believe that ArenaNet cares as much about the dollar as anybody. I think the dollar is all that matters. I have no illusions. They know WoW has a stranglehold on the subscription model, and that B2P is going to allow them to reach a larger audience and build positive word of mouth. They aren't following a F2P model of sucking you in and then making you pay if you want to be competitive. They don't want to suck you in with hype so that you buy the box and turn a quick profit while you find out the game actually sucks. They want to put out the best product they can, charge a fair price for it, and hope that you like it enough to continue playing and buying their expansions/DLCs/whatever the next iteration of their game is.
I think ArenaNet is treating me fairly, and I want to reward that. I could just play Vindictus or whatever F2P thing until the next game comes out. Instead, I'm buying GW expansions that I didn't buy the first time. I'm buying their books. I'm planning on buying 2 extra copies of GW2 and giving them to members of my family. Games that charge $15 a month don't get that kind of support from me.
And finally, can people please stop with the "I don't look to see much outside of killing and looting, just like GW1"? This is radically different gameplay from GW1, from WoW, from everything. There's no quests, instead they have dynamic events that run with or without players. You don't have to talk to NPCs as precursors to events. Events give you gold and karma so you can buy the rewards you want. Events scale depending on number of participating players. Everybody gets loot based on amount of participation. Outdoor raids that anybody can participate in. Griefing in PVE is impossible. Resource nodes are available to everyone. Each person has their own personal storyline. Choices made during character creation affect your story. Instanced section of town will show changes based on your choices in the story. There's no autoattack. Implied targeting. There's no holy trinity. You get half your skills at any time from your weapons. Everybody has a mandatory heal on their bar at all times. You can cast while moving. Projectiles can be dodged. You can block projectiles from hitting people behind you with a shield. Over 100 cross profession combos. People go downed before they die and can pop back up if they kill a mob. Anybody can rez anybody at any time (and be rewarded as participating for it). No death penalty unless you have to release to a graveyard. Dungeons have a story mode and an explorable mode. Dungeons have multiple paths. There are hidden events in corners of the world to reward explorers. People automatically scale down in level to the zone they're in. Or they can sidekick up to play with a higher level friend. Week long world vs world vs world battlegrounds. Battleground winners get a PVE buff for their world. Shooting gallery and other places in town to hang out at. Flat leveling curve. 400 dye colors. Being able to combine weapons to get the stats of one but the look of another (by purchasing one of those vanity cash shop items). You can even (for some reason) see on an iPad what your friends are doing in game.
All for no monthly fee. Now can you see why we think that this B2P game might threaten the P2P model?
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." -Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
Yah it definitely would be a good argument for what you state, but it's also a good argument for B2P. B2P IS essentially a price reduction when compared to P2P, it's just distributing the price differently.
You may look at B2P and think that it's not a sustainable business model because the firm isn't getting that constant P2P income. However, when you look at revenue in terms of how much you make per customer, it paints a bit of a different picture. Here's an example...
Say there is a company developing an MMO and they are trying to decide on a pricing model. They estimate that with a P2P model, the average consumer will buy the box, stay subscribed for 6 months, and buy two ($30) expansions. This means that the VALUE of an average consumer is:
$60 + $15*6 + $30*2 = $210
Now say that the company estimates they will be able to sell their game to 3 million consumers with a P2P model, this means that the total estimated revenue of the game is: $210*3mil = $630 million.
Next, the same company considers a B2P model. Under this model the average consumer buys the box, and buys two ($45) expansions . This means the VALUE of the average consumer is:
$60 + $45*2 = $150
The company estimates that they will be able to sell their game to 6 million consumers with the B2P model, due to reaching consumers that would normally not puchase a P2P game. So the estimated total revenue of the game is: $150*6mil = $900 million.
Anyway, this is just a very simplified (no consideration of expense) example, but you can see where I'm going. Every consumer has a specific value to the firm, and they can likely estimate this value. It is possible that B2P will earn the firm more money than P2P due to mass appeal.
Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?
Isn't it terrible when another MMO game is mentioned in a thread that has nothing to do with it similarly to how SWTOR popped up in this thread which is specific to GW2 and it's business model.
It's bound to happen on these boards and there are fan(boys) of every game that will read a thread and be thinking of how that relates to the game they are hyped about.
Did someone say TERA! Oh wait..... nvm
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
This. ^^
Thank you!
You better let Anet know that they aren't charging enough money to support their game. Whether it's 1 million or 12 million the costs to the support the game will rise and fall with the retail sales. I'm guessing someone thought of that.
You can be certain it will steal subs from other games. I'm not saying it will necessarily be noticable per individual game, but there will be players jumping over. Every live mmo out right now has former, current and never-played GW players temporarily subbed using them as a "filler" of time until GW2's release. I've spoken with them in games, I've read the comments in chats and have read it many times in forums. In addition to that I've seen countless forum posts across gaming forums of people writing that they're going to be getting GW2, as either their sole game or as a secondary. If it's good enough not everyone will maintain their sub game. There truly aren't that many "heavy weights" out there in the genre. A "couple" going okay to strong, many hanging on by threads and a bunch of crud. GW2 is not coming out originally as a pvp-centric, lacking in pve, instanced game as was it's predecessor during it's start.
----------------
Anyone that questions ANet's abilities and dedication to putting out a quality product and maintaining it as well as any p2p game company is just telling me that they haven't experienced ANet long term. As a player of GW over its first three years (aka, when it was ANet's primary focus) and a player of multiple p2p games I have experience from both sides of the fence. ANet updated/patched as often as anyone and typically nearly bug free, and always quick to fix. My most recent p2p game got $15 a month for 18 months as it continually got worse and quality patches went months between. It's still live but I don't know how anyone can justify paying that company monthly. In other words, when comparing the models, the company and specific game come in to play.
Apart from what I've written, I don't have any illusions that ANet's business model will force much of a perceivable change to mmo's. I have little doubt they'll be successful with their approach, but others will have still have success with p2p too I'm sure.