Originally posted by jaxsundane Interesting post op even though I don't have a few hundred to throw around for a lifetime sub to a game I may not play much at all.
Thanks.
I think this is the point for me, really.
I'm at a point where $200 on a lifetime game doesn't really make much difference financially, it might as well be $20 or $2. I'm not a struggling college student, someone facing foreclosure, someone who is about to get sacked or anyone else on a shoestring budget. I have enough money to comfortably pay for things I like to spend time on and ignore the ones I don't want.
But that's not the only reason to buy a game, just because someone can afford it or else people would buy tons of games and never play them.
It does factor in many people's decision though but they don't admit it, usually. It's easier to just say "This game isn't worth so and so" for some who'd maybe like a sub but have to buy monthly time cards due to situational circumstances because that's how life goes.
I look at it simply:
Do I think I'll be playing this game enough to justify buying it, do I think the game will be around in 3-5 years time and do I think it's fun enough to pass to my kids where they would enjoy it. Yes on all.
Agreed...plus this game won't last that long anyway.
Based on what? how will this game not be around that long?
It appears.. based on what he thinks SoE MIGHT do considering how angrily he posted against them as 'proof'.
You know, "I hate SoE and I hope/think everything they do will fail hard". You see people with avatars like that, lol. They got 'lied to' once when their game tanked, so it's all SoE's fault or something.
He hasn't given any reasons why he thinks DCUO will fail yet other than the SoE defense. For some people on the internet, that's enough reason as illogical as it is.
Originally posted by Sunioj Originally posted by popinjay SoE doesn't shut down games.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they shut down Matrix Online?
Posted by me, same post you got that from:
SoE doesn't shut down games.
Only one I know they shut down is The Matrix Online.
Now compare that with their games overall:
EverQuest Next TBA PC EverQuest Next is an Interim title
The Agency TBA PC, PlayStation 3
Magic: The Gathering Tactics January 18, 2011 for PC; TBA for PS3 PC, PlayStation 3
DC Universe Online January 11, 2011 PC, PlayStation 3
Fortune League January 7, 2011 Facebook Developed with Fastpoint Games
Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures September 15, 2010 PC
Peggle and Peggle Nights November 19, 2009 PlayStation Network Handled the port with PopCap Games
Free Realms April 28, 2009 for PC; March 11, 2011[6] for PS3 PC, PlayStation 3
Bejeweled 2 January 29, 2009 PlayStation Network Handled the port with PopCap Games
Pirates of the Burning Sea January 22, 2008 PC
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes January 30, 2007 PC Co-Published with Sigil Games
Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom November 19, 2006 PlayStation 3
Cash Guns Chaos November 17, 2006 PlayStation Network
PoxNora August 1, 2006 PC
Field Commander May 23, 2006 PSP
Untold Legends: The Warrior's Code March 28, 2006 PSP
The Matrix Online August 9, 2005 PC Warner Bros. and Sega officially released The Matrix Online on March 22, 2005 in the USA. SOE assumed operation on August 9, 2005. The servers for the game were shut down in July 2009.
Untold Legends: Brotherhood of the Blade March 22, 2005 PSP
Champions: Return to Arms February 7, 2005 PlayStation 2
EverQuest II November 8, 2004 PC
Champions of Norrath February 10, 2004 PlayStation 2
Lords of EverQuest December 12, 2003 PC Developed by Rapid Eye Entertainment
Zuma December 12, 2003 PlayStation Network The world continues with PopCap Games Frameworks.
Star Chamber: The Harbinger Saga November 2003 PC
EverQuest Online Adventures: Frontiers November 17, 2003 PlayStation 2
Star Wars Galaxies June 26, 2003 PC Published by LucasArts
PlanetSide May 20, 2003 PC
EverQuest Online Adventures February 11, 2003 PlayStation 2
Cosmic Rift April 17, 2001 PC
Infantry October 1999 PC
EverQuest March 16, 1999 PC
Tanarus
They shut down ONE shitty MMO. We Humans are such irrationally fearful bags of meat, lol.
I predict this game will be F2P in less then a year....
Wouldn't surprise me. Wouldn't surprise me if they've already planned its transition to F2P. With the DC IP, they'd be crazy to go F2P out of the gate; they'll get lots of initial subs. But every nook and cranny of the game itself screams F2P. Not F2P, as in poor quality; I think that, what's there anyway, is a good quality game. But just the design decisions they made. How they've split out the world... the food, etc., just says "we're gonna sell this in pieces, someday".
That said, if they had a lifer subscription option, I'd assume those people would get free Sonybuxx every month. So if you really like the game, a lifer sub wouldn't be a waste.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they shut down Matrix Online?
Posted by me, same post you got that from:
SoE doesn't shut down games.
Only one I know they shut down is The Matrix Online.
Now compare that with their games overall:
EverQuest Next TBA PC EverQuest Next is an Interim title
The Agency TBA PC, PlayStation 3
Magic: The Gathering – Tactics January 18, 2011 for PC; TBA for PS3 PC, PlayStation 3
DC Universe Online January 11, 2011 PC, PlayStation 3
Fortune League January 7, 2011 Facebook Developed with Fastpoint Games
Star Wars: Clone Wars Adventures September 15, 2010 PC
Peggle and Peggle Nights November 19, 2009 PlayStation Network Handled the port with PopCap Games
Free Realms April 28, 2009 for PC; March 11, 2011[6] for PS3 PC, PlayStation 3
Bejeweled 2 January 29, 2009 PlayStation Network Handled the port with PopCap Games
Pirates of the Burning Sea January 22, 2008 PC
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes January 30, 2007 PC Co-Published with Sigil Games
Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom November 19, 2006 PlayStation 3
Cash Guns Chaos November 17, 2006 PlayStation Network
PoxNora August 1, 2006 PC
Field Commander May 23, 2006 PSP
Untold Legends: The Warrior's Code March 28, 2006 PSP
The Matrix Online August 9, 2005 PC Warner Bros. and Sega officially released The Matrix Online on March 22, 2005 in the USA. SOE assumed operation on August 9, 2005. The servers for the game were shut down in July 2009.
Untold Legends: Brotherhood of the Blade March 22, 2005 PSP
Champions: Return to Arms February 7, 2005 PlayStation 2
EverQuest II November 8, 2004 PC
Champions of Norrath February 10, 2004 PlayStation 2
Lords of EverQuest December 12, 2003 PC Developed by Rapid Eye Entertainment
Zuma December 12, 2003 PlayStation Network The world continues with PopCap Games Frameworks.
Star Chamber: The Harbinger Saga November 2003 PC
EverQuest Online Adventures: Frontiers November 17, 2003 PlayStation 2
Star Wars Galaxies June 26, 2003 PC Published by LucasArts
PlanetSide May 20, 2003 PC
EverQuest Online Adventures February 11, 2003 PlayStation 2
Cosmic Rift April 17, 2001 PC
Infantry October 1999 PC
EverQuest March 16, 1999 PC
Tanarus
They shut down ONE shitty MMO. We Humans are such irrationally fearful bags of meat, lol.
With the whatever colored glasses on, you are missing the entire point: most of those games on there are not closed per se, but they are no longer supported/minimally supported. Once they go beyond a certain age, SOE stops caring.
Thus, making the idea of buying a lifetime sub, dumb.
Of those on the list forMMO PC, Planetside, Vanguard no longer have any devs support.
SWG is down to a dev team of 2 full timers or less, Pirates of the BS is/was so dead just went F2P. EQ2 also F2P or loaded with micros and a sub fee.
Most of what is left is garbage.
It is not like people are making this stuff up, or is it just that you refuse to see?
Would gladly pay a sub over a f2p aslong as they update regular.Two hudge cities with 1000's of heroes and villains slugging it out,for that alone I think it's worth the sub fee,nevermind all the other stuff too.
The servers are qued all there time as it is,if it was f2p they would melt and that point proves the game is doing good as it with no need to even start to think about a f2p model.
Burntvet makes a great point. SOE doesn't shut games down, but they do cut support for those games. The only difference is that SOE is charging a monthly fee for a game that most other developers would have closed down years ago.
Just look at the list of games that get near zero support or have such an incredibly small team that the updates are little more than bug fixes and reskinned assets.
EQ-Mac
EQ Online Adventures
The Matrix Online (finally closed)
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Planetside
Star Wars Galaxies
Free Realms (which has a decent sized dev team, but most of the content goes straight to the cash shop)
I'm not sure which of those titles would be inspiration for making a lifetime subscription payment to be a wise choice.
The last two games that have decent support are
Everquest
Everquest II (heading the same direction that free realms is)
Now there is DCU. A game that took $50 million, 5 years and work from all four game studios for soe and the result is a game that is very content light on top of the other issues and things that typically hickup during a new release.
If the game isn't worth paying $15 a month for I just don't see how it is somehow worth paying that same fee for 16 months in advance. Maybe if the developers can live up to their promises of massive content updates, but history and common sense say that isn't very likely.
Just looking at how delayed most of the work soe has been doing and how often they pull assests from several games to work on some new flashy project it doesn't leave a lot of faith that DCU will always get the resources it needs. EQ2 is falling behind. The Agency is already years behind schedule. EQNext is coming up and that is going to be their most important project.
Originally posted by Robsolf That said, if they had a lifer subscription option, I'd assume those people would get free Sonybuxx every month. So if you really like the game, a lifer sub wouldn't be a waste.
Yep, same type of model somewhat like LOTRO, STO and others that once charged and had lifetimes.
The Lifetime players never have to buy anymore update when it's added and they usually get so many points each month to spend on things F2Ps usually end up buying anyways.
With the whatever colored glasses on, you are missing the entire point: most of those games on there are not closed per se, but they are no longer supported/minimally supported. Once they go beyond a certain age, SOE stops caring. Thus, making the idea of buying a lifetime sub, dumb. Of those on the list forMMO PC, Planetside, Vanguard no longer have any devs support. SWG is down to a dev team of 2 full timers or less, Pirates of the BS is/was so dead just went F2P. EQ2 also F2P or loaded with micros and a sub fee. Most of what is left is garbage.
It is not like people are making this stuff up, or is it just that you refuse to see?
I understand your point fully. You don't think lifetime subs are worth it. You're clear on that point.
I think they are worth it for me, which is what you don't seem to get. There are others who buy lifetimes as well so I'm not really concerned about your reasons why you shouldn't because your point isn't fullproof. You seem like a single guy who probably would be the only one playing it. Everyone doesn't fit that mold and has more than one person in a household who can enjoy a lifetime sub.
There are many more games that had NO Lifetime Plans that treated their customers like crap and strung them along. Mythic with Warhammer most recently comes to mind.
Personally I saw that coming from their release date and said so. But Mythic fans insisted their company listened to them unlike SoE or anyone else. They faithfully paid every month for a game that I though stunk and was rife with bugs. But you know what? Their company lied to them about what was coming in the game and what they said would/wouldn't be in at launch (NO STEALTH, lol) Square Enix did the same at launch with it's loyal fans on FFXIV so.. any company can do what they like. But if you like, you can keep standing outside the office and picketing with "SoE unfair!" if you like while other people play if that makes you feel better. It's certainly obvious they shot your dog at some point.
Any company can let down its CORE fans so what do I care as a non SoE fan if SoE lies? They've already lied on release day where Cao says it's a casual type game (5-7 hrs a week) and Smedley said it's a "hard core" focus. But I already know its a company/business and all of them lie, period. You act as if some lie and some don't, lol.
If this one time they don't allow support to just dry up as you claim, guess what? You'd miss an opportunity with egg on your face for paying more every month if you were interested at launch. Especially if they pull the offer back, which I hope they do. Even if it goes F2P, so what? I still wouldn't have to pay for crap they add when they do and there are quite a few people that will play this F2P and spend $10/mo on comtunems and crap.
Of course, you'd care then just about as much as I care now about what you think a lifetime sub is worth to me.
Those games that don't get support don't get it because of one reaosn or another, not the SAME reason as you're suggesting. Vanguard was too big to fix totally from it's launch problems and people didn't come back; why continue supporting a game few play? POTBS was bad at lauch.. and few wanted to play a 'pirate game' lol. Planetside? PvP at a time when the majority of the genre wasn't PvPing along with other problems.
Burntvet makes a great point. SOE doesn't shut games down, but they do cut support for those games. The only difference is that SOE is charging a monthly fee for a game that most other developers would have closed down years ago.
Just look at the list of games that get near zero support or have such an incredibly small team that the updates are little more than bug fixes and reskinned assets.
EQ-Mac
EQ Online Adventures
The Matrix Online (finally closed)
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Planetside
Star Wars Galaxies
Free Realms (which has a decent sized dev team, but most of the content goes straight to the cash shop)
I'm not sure which of those titles would be inspiration for making a lifetime subscription payment to be a wise choice.
The last two games that have decent support are
Everquest
Everquest II (heading the same direction that free realms is)
Now there is DCU. A game that took $50 million, 5 years and work from all four game studios for soe and the result is a game that is very content light on top of the other issues and things that typically hickup during a new release.
If the game isn't worth paying $15 a month for I just don't see how it is somehow worth paying that same fee for 16 months in advance. Maybe if the developers can live up to their promises of massive content updates, but history and common sense say that isn't very likely.
Just looking at how delayed most of the work soe has been doing and how often they pull assests from several games to work on some new flashy project it doesn't leave a lot of faith that DCU will always get the resources it needs. EQ2 is falling behind. The Agency is already years behind schedule. EQNext is coming up and that is going to be their most important project.
Yeah shame on them for keeping the servers going because PEOPLE STILL LOG IN AND PLAY. It isnt like they are holding a gun to peoples head and saying subscribe or i will shoot.
I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
When described like that, most games sound like a waste of money.
I think most have missed the point of this game. They don't want it to be a grind to level infinity but instead want the person to feel like they are a super hero so they make getting to the level cap relativly easy. As far as being shallow I like the game and if they can come through with the monthly content it is all the better for me. The areas are huge but they make getting around them easy because well you are a super hero so you have flight and super speed etc. to get from point A to point B.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
Originally posted by LauZaIM I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
You're not gambling with $200. You're gambling with $50. After a month if they haven't added their first monthly installment that they promised, stop playing (and paying for) the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Yeah shame on them for keeping the servers going because PEOPLE STILL LOG IN AND PLAY. It isnt like they are holding a gun to peoples head and saying subscribe or i will shoot.
The point wasn't that they should close the games down, but that those games are not being supported. Which is relevent to this topic. Considering that companies have used support and content updates as justification for the monthly subscription fee.
More power to the people that still find enjoyment in games that are being sold as-is, but this company does have a very long history of abandoning games and drastically slashing support and updates. Soe abandons games and breaks promises like no one else in this industry. That makes paying a huge upfront fee based on their promises a very questionable idea, especially when someone considers the current offering to not be worthy of the single month fee.
If the game isn't worth paying $15 a month for I just don't see how it is somehow worth paying that same fee for 16 months in advance. Maybe if the developers can live up to their promises of massive content updates, but history and common sense say that isn't very likely.
These are expansions done with SoE games:
The Ruins of Kunark (March 2000) The Scars of Velious (December 2000) The Shadows of Luclin (December 2001) The Planes of Power (October 2002) The Legacy of Ykesha (February 2003) Lost Dungeons of Norrath (September 2003) Gates of Discord (February 2004) Omens of War (September 2004) Dragons of Norrath (February 2005) Depths of Darkhollow (September 2005) Prophecy of Ro (February 2006) The Serpent's Spine (September 2006) The Buried Sea (February 2007) Secrets of Faydwer (November 2007) Seeds of Destruction (October 2008) The Bloodline Chronicles (March 2005) The Splitpaw Saga (June 2005) Desert of Flames (September 2005) Kingdom of Sky (February 2006) The Fallen Dynasty (June 2006) Echoes of Faydwer (November 2006) Rise of Kunark (November 2007) The Shadow Odyssey (November 2008) Frontiers (November 2003) Underfoot (Cancelled in November 2003)
Jump to Lightspeed PC (October 2004) Rage of the Wookiees PC (May 2005) Trials of Obi-Wan PC (November 2005)
There's more of course and that's just the quick Wiki list, but thats' just a lot to list.
The games that sell or have populations get support. The games that don't.. don't. I think that's the fundamental issue here, not that SoE is letting POPULAR games go down the hill. It's precisely why EA is letting Warhammer slide right into the crapper; no one is playing it anymore so why send support? They saw the numbers drop so it's either F2P or scrapcanned in the future.
No businessman in his right mind would keep propping a dish that doesn't sell in his restaurant; he'd take it off the menu or leave it as is.
Reading it from that perspective, someone should be able say "Well, I see how it works for you but those reasons don't fit for me." Not "Whoever buys a lifetime sub is a moron", lol.
But people like him are trying to say why lifetime doesn't work for Popinjay or anyone in any gaming case whatsoever, which is pretty narrow or selfish in thought.
Originally posted by Burntvet Anyone who buys a lifetime sub to any MMO is pretty much a stupid consumer.
Again, I'm not worried about "SoE's history". They didn't wrong me and actually I feel I got great value for EQ2 when I played it. So in MY case, it makes more sense to get it and not look at someone else's tears of sorrow because they played The Matrix and it got canned.
I'm not part of their soapbox internet campaign vs 'Herpa Derp... Dat Ebil SoE Empire iz da Debil!' or some Quakerish dogma against buying lifetime subs as a central tenet because it's 'bad for other customers', ruins gaming and is bad for the ozone layer, lol.
Trust me.. I'm HIGHLY critical of DCUO as you already know. Fanbois here got upset at how I posted the game's shortcomings and I still say it's not an MMO, lol. The only reason I'd play this game as a lifetime sub since I'm not a SoE employee or ga-ga goo-goo DC fan (I like Marvel much better) is like I said:
The game has to be fun (which is it) and I'd have to think it had a future from looking at the game after playing it and knowing what they can do with it. It's an instanced game so that means plenty of room to throw things in for the most part and I don't mind that much.
Originally posted by lizardbones Originally posted by LauZaIM I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
You're not gambling with $200. You're gambling with $50. After a month if they haven't added their first monthly installment that they promised, stop playing (and paying for) the game. Precisely, which is what some people still fail to get here.
If I pay $200 once the first month and the game closes in a year but I liked it, I would be 'out' roughly $100 all things considered, but would have felt I got my money's worth of value for the fun.
However, if I paid $50 first month, played two weeks and hated the game and uninstalled out of boredom, I would have felt as if I wasted $50 and got cheated, and in the case of some of these posters.. angry vs 'evil SoE" for five years or more. You know... "I'll never buy another SoE game because blah blah blah"
So I ask you, who's worse off when the amount isn't the thing but contentness is?
The disgruntled $50 guy who'll haunt the boards forever in a troll suit.
I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
You're not gambling with $200. You're gambling with $50. After a month if they haven't added their first monthly installment that they promised, stop playing (and paying for) the game.
Precisely, which is what some people still fail to get here.
If I pay $200 once the first month and the game closes in a year but I liked it, I would be 'out' roughly $100 all things considered, but would have felt I got my money's worth of value for the fun.
However, if I paid $50 first month, played two weeks and hated the game and uninstalled out of boredom, I would have felt as if I wasted $50 and got cheated, and in the case of some of these posters.. angry vs 'evil SoE" for five years or more. You know... "I'll never buy another SoE game because blah blah blah"
So I ask you, who's worse off when the amount isn't the thing but contentness is?
The disgruntled $50 guy who'll haunt the boards forever in a troll suit.
But... if .. contentness is what hinges on getting your moneys worth, then how could it ever be said that this game isn't worth the 15 dollars a month? For those people paying 15 dollars, wouldn't that mean that they are content in doing so? Wouldn't that mean it is worth it to them?
Originally posted by maskedweasel But... if .. contentness is what hinges on getting your moneys worth, then how could it ever be said that this game isn't worth the 15 dollars a month? For those people paying 15 dollars, wouldn't that mean that they are content in doing so? Wouldn't that mean it is worth it to them?
Okay, I'll try one more time.
This game isn't worth $15/mo to ME, but it's worth a lifetime sub because they don't seem to have a lot of content now (with which you disagreed with many times), there is room to add on in the future. It's the perfect game to log in and play for an hour, do a dungeon or PvP and log out. You don't have to play this everyday or all day. For me, it's the perfect game to play with Rift, SWTOR and GW2. To me, it's like Vindictus with better characters, better art and better support.
For others (You), it's not worth a lifetime sub but it is worth a $15 monthly fee. You only plan to play it until something else comes out, then poof, you'll stop paying as you said. It's a stopgap measure.
For other still, it's not worth money at any price a month, they'd only play it for free. (others who have posted here) They want a fuller, deeper traditional MMO that doesn't have hitches like clicking all day or crazy chat channels, crafting, and auction house, huge world, fishing, housing, dynamic content etc. They would play this but not at any cost.
Originally posted by Burntvet And thus they say, a fanatic is one "Who won't change their mind, and can't change the subject." The best you can hope to do, as a responsible and reasonable community member, is expose the fanticism for what it is. Since reasonable discussion appears to be right out.....
The reasonable argument being the one you posed?
--Quoteth the Church of the Jaded Gamer, Book of Burntvet, Chapter One, Verse One:
Originally posted by Burntvet
Thou who buys a lifetime sub to ANY MMO is pretty much a stupid consumer and shall be burned amid the fires of Hellgate: London.
*Changed slightly for comedic effect. Just in fun Burnt^^
Comments
I think this is the point for me, really.
I'm at a point where $200 on a lifetime game doesn't really make much difference financially, it might as well be $20 or $2. I'm not a struggling college student, someone facing foreclosure, someone who is about to get sacked or anyone else on a shoestring budget. I have enough money to comfortably pay for things I like to spend time on and ignore the ones I don't want.
But that's not the only reason to buy a game, just because someone can afford it or else people would buy tons of games and never play them.
It does factor in many people's decision though but they don't admit it, usually. It's easier to just say "This game isn't worth so and so" for some who'd maybe like a sub but have to buy monthly time cards due to situational circumstances because that's how life goes.
I look at it simply:
Do I think I'll be playing this game enough to justify buying it, do I think the game will be around in 3-5 years time and do I think it's fun enough to pass to my kids where they would enjoy it. Yes on all.
"TO MICHAEL!"
It will be one day, don't worry. Just like LOTRO and CO and DDO and more are now considering.
Quite a few MMOs will eventually end up like this after being out a few years if they've started this way charging $15/mo.
"TO MICHAEL!"
It appears.. based on what he thinks SoE MIGHT do considering how angrily he posted against them as 'proof'.You know, "I hate SoE and I hope/think everything they do will fail hard". You see people with avatars like that, lol. They got 'lied to' once when their game tanked, so it's all SoE's fault or something.
He hasn't given any reasons why he thinks DCUO will fail yet other than the SoE defense. For some people on the internet, that's enough reason as illogical as it is.
Always cracks me up when I see it though.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they shut down Matrix Online?
Momo sucks, I have proof.
Now compare that with their games overall:
They shut down ONE shitty MMO. We Humans are such irrationally fearful bags of meat, lol.
"TO MICHAEL!"
Thanks Popin, you made me LOL!
Momo sucks, I have proof.
Wouldn't surprise me. Wouldn't surprise me if they've already planned its transition to F2P. With the DC IP, they'd be crazy to go F2P out of the gate; they'll get lots of initial subs. But every nook and cranny of the game itself screams F2P. Not F2P, as in poor quality; I think that, what's there anyway, is a good quality game. But just the design decisions they made. How they've split out the world... the food, etc., just says "we're gonna sell this in pieces, someday".
That said, if they had a lifer subscription option, I'd assume those people would get free Sonybuxx every month. So if you really like the game, a lifer sub wouldn't be a waste.
With the whatever colored glasses on, you are missing the entire point: most of those games on there are not closed per se, but they are no longer supported/minimally supported. Once they go beyond a certain age, SOE stops caring.
Thus, making the idea of buying a lifetime sub, dumb.
Of those on the list forMMO PC, Planetside, Vanguard no longer have any devs support.
SWG is down to a dev team of 2 full timers or less, Pirates of the BS is/was so dead just went F2P. EQ2 also F2P or loaded with micros and a sub fee.
Most of what is left is garbage.
It is not like people are making this stuff up, or is it just that you refuse to see?
Would gladly pay a sub over a f2p aslong as they update regular.Two hudge cities with 1000's of heroes and villains slugging it out,for that alone I think it's worth the sub fee,nevermind all the other stuff too.
The servers are qued all there time as it is,if it was f2p they would melt and that point proves the game is doing good as it with no need to even start to think about a f2p model.
Burntvet makes a great point. SOE doesn't shut games down, but they do cut support for those games. The only difference is that SOE is charging a monthly fee for a game that most other developers would have closed down years ago.
Just look at the list of games that get near zero support or have such an incredibly small team that the updates are little more than bug fixes and reskinned assets.
EQ-Mac
EQ Online Adventures
The Matrix Online (finally closed)
Vanguard: Saga of Heroes
Planetside
Star Wars Galaxies
Free Realms (which has a decent sized dev team, but most of the content goes straight to the cash shop)
I'm not sure which of those titles would be inspiration for making a lifetime subscription payment to be a wise choice.
The last two games that have decent support are
Everquest
Everquest II (heading the same direction that free realms is)
Now there is DCU. A game that took $50 million, 5 years and work from all four game studios for soe and the result is a game that is very content light on top of the other issues and things that typically hickup during a new release.
If the game isn't worth paying $15 a month for I just don't see how it is somehow worth paying that same fee for 16 months in advance. Maybe if the developers can live up to their promises of massive content updates, but history and common sense say that isn't very likely.
Just looking at how delayed most of the work soe has been doing and how often they pull assests from several games to work on some new flashy project it doesn't leave a lot of faith that DCU will always get the resources it needs. EQ2 is falling behind. The Agency is already years behind schedule. EQNext is coming up and that is going to be their most important project.
The Lifetime players never have to buy anymore update when it's added and they usually get so many points each month to spend on things F2Ps usually end up buying anyways.
"TO MICHAEL!"
You start off by saying it's a shallow game, and not worth $15 a month, and your trying to justify a lifetime membership.
People tell you why it's a bad idea and you keep posting the same crap why its a good idea. Seems like your just trying to convince yourself.
In the end nobody really cares if you pay or dont pay, so just what is the point of this thread?
I think they are worth it for me, which is what you don't seem to get. There are others who buy lifetimes as well so I'm not really concerned about your reasons why you shouldn't because your point isn't fullproof. You seem like a single guy who probably would be the only one playing it. Everyone doesn't fit that mold and has more than one person in a household who can enjoy a lifetime sub.
There are many more games that had NO Lifetime Plans that treated their customers like crap and strung them along. Mythic with Warhammer most recently comes to mind.
Personally I saw that coming from their release date and said so. But Mythic fans insisted their company listened to them unlike SoE or anyone else. They faithfully paid every month for a game that I though stunk and was rife with bugs. But you know what? Their company lied to them about what was coming in the game and what they said would/wouldn't be in at launch (NO STEALTH, lol) Square Enix did the same at launch with it's loyal fans on FFXIV so.. any company can do what they like. But if you like, you can keep standing outside the office and picketing with "SoE unfair!" if you like while other people play if that makes you feel better. It's certainly obvious they shot your dog at some point.
Any company can let down its CORE fans so what do I care as a non SoE fan if SoE lies? They've already lied on release day where Cao says it's a casual type game (5-7 hrs a week) and Smedley said it's a "hard core" focus. But I already know its a company/business and all of them lie, period. You act as if some lie and some don't, lol.
If this one time they don't allow support to just dry up as you claim, guess what? You'd miss an opportunity with egg on your face for paying more every month if you were interested at launch. Especially if they pull the offer back, which I hope they do. Even if it goes F2P, so what? I still wouldn't have to pay for crap they add when they do and there are quite a few people that will play this F2P and spend $10/mo on comtunems and crap.
Of course, you'd care then just about as much as I care now about what you think a lifetime sub is worth to me.
Those games that don't get support don't get it because of one reaosn or another, not the SAME reason as you're suggesting. Vanguard was too big to fix totally from it's launch problems and people didn't come back; why continue supporting a game few play? POTBS was bad at lauch.. and few wanted to play a 'pirate game' lol. Planetside? PvP at a time when the majority of the genre wasn't PvPing along with other problems.
"TO MICHAEL!"
I can't imagine getting 16 months of playtime out of a game that is this shallow. I personally can't imagine getting much more then 1 month of playtime out of it. Trusting a company to add sufficient content over the course of 16 months to keep me playing is a gamble that I would never take with 200 dollars. If my objective was to entertain myself and kids I would by a game that doesn't have monthly fees, and is much more deep from the start instead of blowing 30-50 + 200 dollars on ONE game that may or may not add good content and may or may not fail. If you like gambling on this companies ability to keep this game active and you like replaying the same thing over with different boss models, then go for it. In my opinion it's a waste of money.
When described like that, most games sound like a waste of money.
I think most have missed the point of this game. They don't want it to be a grind to level infinity but instead want the person to feel like they are a super hero so they make getting to the level cap relativly easy. As far as being shallow I like the game and if they can come through with the monthly content it is all the better for me. The areas are huge but they make getting around them easy because well you are a super hero so you have flight and super speed etc. to get from point A to point B.
"You think this "A" stands for France?" Captain America
You're not gambling with $200. You're gambling with $50. After a month if they haven't added their first monthly installment that they promised, stop playing (and paying for) the game.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The point wasn't that they should close the games down, but that those games are not being supported. Which is relevent to this topic. Considering that companies have used support and content updates as justification for the monthly subscription fee.
More power to the people that still find enjoyment in games that are being sold as-is, but this company does have a very long history of abandoning games and drastically slashing support and updates. Soe abandons games and breaks promises like no one else in this industry. That makes paying a huge upfront fee based on their promises a very questionable idea, especially when someone considers the current offering to not be worthy of the single month fee.
There's more of course and that's just the quick Wiki list, but thats' just a lot to list.
The games that sell or have populations get support. The games that don't.. don't. I think that's the fundamental issue here, not that SoE is letting POPULAR games go down the hill. It's precisely why EA is letting Warhammer slide right into the crapper; no one is playing it anymore so why send support? They saw the numbers drop so it's either F2P or scrapcanned in the future.
No businessman in his right mind would keep propping a dish that doesn't sell in his restaurant; he'd take it off the menu or leave it as is.
Reading it from that perspective, someone should be able say "Well, I see how it works for you but those reasons don't fit for me." Not "Whoever buys a lifetime sub is a moron", lol.
But people like him are trying to say why lifetime doesn't work for Popinjay or anyone in any gaming case whatsoever, which is pretty narrow or selfish in thought.
Again, I'm not worried about "SoE's history". They didn't wrong me and actually I feel I got great value for EQ2 when I played it. So in MY case, it makes more sense to get it and not look at someone else's tears of sorrow because they played The Matrix and it got canned.
I'm not part of their soapbox internet campaign vs 'Herpa Derp... Dat Ebil SoE Empire iz da Debil!' or some Quakerish dogma against buying lifetime subs as a central tenet because it's 'bad for other customers', ruins gaming and is bad for the ozone layer, lol.
Trust me.. I'm HIGHLY critical of DCUO as you already know. Fanbois here got upset at how I posted the game's shortcomings and I still say it's not an MMO, lol. The only reason I'd play this game as a lifetime sub since I'm not a SoE employee or ga-ga goo-goo DC fan (I like Marvel much better) is like I said:
The game has to be fun (which is it) and I'd have to think it had a future from looking at the game after playing it and knowing what they can do with it. It's an instanced game so that means plenty of room to throw things in for the most part and I don't mind that much.
"TO MICHAEL!"
You're not gambling with $200. You're gambling with $50. After a month if they haven't added their first monthly installment that they promised, stop playing (and paying for) the game.
Precisely, which is what some people still fail to get here.
If I pay $200 once the first month and the game closes in a year but I liked it, I would be 'out' roughly $100 all things considered, but would have felt I got my money's worth of value for the fun.
However, if I paid $50 first month, played two weeks and hated the game and uninstalled out of boredom, I would have felt as if I wasted $50 and got cheated, and in the case of some of these posters.. angry vs 'evil SoE" for five years or more. You know... "I'll never buy another SoE game because blah blah blah"
So I ask you, who's worse off when the amount isn't the thing but contentness is?
The disgruntled $50 guy who'll haunt the boards forever in a troll suit.
"TO MICHAEL!"
And thus they say, a fanatic is one "Who won't change their mind, and can't change the subject."
The best you can hope to do, as a responsible and reasonable community member, is expose the fanticism for what it is.
Since reasonable discussion appears to be right out.....
But... if .. contentness is what hinges on getting your moneys worth, then how could it ever be said that this game isn't worth the 15 dollars a month? For those people paying 15 dollars, wouldn't that mean that they are content in doing so? Wouldn't that mean it is worth it to them?
Okay, I'll try one more time.
This game isn't worth $15/mo to ME, but it's worth a lifetime sub because they don't seem to have a lot of content now (with which you disagreed with many times), there is room to add on in the future. It's the perfect game to log in and play for an hour, do a dungeon or PvP and log out. You don't have to play this everyday or all day. For me, it's the perfect game to play with Rift, SWTOR and GW2. To me, it's like Vindictus with better characters, better art and better support.
For others (You), it's not worth a lifetime sub but it is worth a $15 monthly fee.
You only plan to play it until something else comes out, then poof, you'll stop paying as you said. It's a stopgap measure.
For other still, it's not worth money at any price a month, they'd only play it for free. (others who have posted here) They want a fuller, deeper traditional MMO that doesn't have hitches like clicking all day or crazy chat channels, crafting, and auction house, huge world, fishing, housing, dynamic content etc. They would play this but not at any cost.
"TO MICHAEL!"
--Quoteth the Church of the Jaded Gamer, Book of Burntvet, Chapter One, Verse One:
*Changed slightly for comedic effect. Just in fun Burnt^^
"TO MICHAEL!"