first off , subs where introduced back in the old days when bandwidth cost a lot more money then today, today it cost them pennies per player compared to dollars back in the day.
2nd they worry so much about all the whiners quitting that they give in to them and lose their focus on the game and often go down the wrong path.
With B2P if I wish to speak with my wallet I just dont buy expansions or shop items.
I've been paying 15 dollars a month since November of 2011 for 8 raid bosses, a bigger bank, 3 heroics dungeons, and a wardrobe feature in World of Warcraft. Mists of Pandaria (which I will have to pay for) won't be for another 6 months at best. 10 Months of 4.3 x 15/month = $150.
If this is what Sub based MMOs get me, SCEW SUB MMOs.
I used to be a huge fan of subscription based MMORPGs, Everquest, EQ2, FFXI, etc... But that was a different time. I felt like I got my moneys worth with those games. Those times are long gone.
Bring on Buy 2 Play model. We're ready.
This. The subscription fee is a remnant of a time when bandwidth was actually expensive, producing content was much harder and the MMO market was only a fraction of what it is today.
Nowadays very few MMOs actually invest any significant fraction of their income on producing new content.
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
/tiphat
What they will have is activity charting to tell them if people are playing or not. Combined with sales figures from the cash shop, ArenaNet will have a very powerful indicator available to them to tell them if people like any changes. If play activity drops off, so will cash shop sales, and I needn't remind you that cash shop sales are required for the game to survive. It's not something they can afford to ignore.
There you go, players voting with their wallets.
Then again, they might just do it the old fashion way and listen to what their community is saying. It seems they do that quite a lot even now, before we've even paid them a dime.
Yeah a very fatal flaw. They never sold 6.5 million units of the first game. The studio went broke and shut down. There will never ever be a sequel to this horrible fatally flawed GW1. Whoever uses B2P is doomed.
Show me the subscription based MMO where the pressure of the subscription model made a better game. Subscription based games are under constant pressure to provide carrot and stick treadmills to keep those addicted to such things paying a monthly fee, but that mid set has been a large reason the genre has remained stagnant since WoW. "Make a WoW clone + carrot on a stick end game treadmills = profit"? That's been the formula and it has failed.
+1
Spot on!
Show me a "Buy to Play" or "Free to Play" model that didn't go Pay-To-Win and could still provide a constant stream of QUALITY & Content?
Guild Wars isn't a good example, as their updates were pretty sad. The only way they sustained themselves, and provided content, was through paid expansions. Essentially a "Subscription Fee" rolled up into an expansion for content.
I'd much rather have $15/month with free expansions like EVE. It's part of the reason EvE has sustained itself for so long. They have a superior business model . Or, at least in my opinion anyways.
Yes but in EvE can't you play for free by paying for said fee through ISK I do beleave they still do this right and if so why is there a need to pay a fee when you can play it for free. As for the whole is sub better then B2P well its been proven so many times even mirosoft said game companys dont need to charge a fee these days cause a server does not run that much to maintain as they used to. Also didn't WoW make 10 million+ a month off subs but only released small updates through the year all end game content and then an expansion every 3 or 4 years at start till the last 2 which are 1 year apart. As for if I spend money on a game to buy it I better be able to play it and sense I cant do that with a sub game unless I pay its not worth it to me cause as stated theres been a ton of games past and now that offer server side pay and dont charge a fee and have updates and so on in them as well even new games such as BF3, CoD, Boarderlands, and even Diablo is B2P they might not be mmo but are online games with constant running servers and dont charge me to play even Sacred 2 had open world play online and never had to pay to play on them. So your point here is we get more if we pay a monthly sub I can go play a F2P game and get all content for free and still enjoy the game at no cost cause they dont require you to buy anything even tho I do if the games good enough for me to pay alittle. So in closing your point makes no sense there where F2P/B2P way before they hit super big 6 years ago there have been F2P games sense the web started they where muds but free to play.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
/tiphat
I disagree.
For one, GW1 was also B2P and the developers were very responsive to what the players wanted. With GW2 Anet also seems to be just as (if not more so) responsive to feedback.
For two, I think this forum is a very good indicator of just how much players actually vote with their wallet. Hint: they don't. There's a very real trend of games coming out that have flaws showing pre-launch, people dump a lot of money into it, and then complain later when it's not what they expected. There are so many examples of just how little the subscription model actually does for a game, I'm not sure it's even worth counting.
As far as B2P becoming an industry standard, I think you're points are a lot more valid. The system really relies on the developers reputation, and them being concerned enough with it to keep generating quality content. I don't think enough developers actually do this, though. This is one of those cases, where some clever individuals had an idea they wanted to make, and found an edge that allowed them to do so. It's unconventional, but it's done in an intellgent way, and thus it works.
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
/tiphat
You still vote with your wallet, there will be new expansion every year or so, if you didn´t like what have been going on you wont buy that.
Besides, GW1 already have had polls, I remember doing one for "War in Kryta". Making one after every patch is counter productive though, there will mostly be whine over nerfs anyways, and someone have to work on all that feedback.
Show me the subscription based MMO where the pressure of the subscription model made a better game. Subscription based games are under constant pressure to provide carrot and stick treadmills to keep those addicted to such things paying a monthly fee, but that mid set has been a large reason the genre has remained stagnant since WoW. "Make a WoW clone + carrot on a stick end game treadmills = profit"? That's been the formula and it has failed.
+1
Spot on!
Show me a "Buy to Play" or "Free to Play" model that didn't go Pay-To-Win and could still provide a constant stream of QUALITY & Content?
Guild Wars isn't a good example, as their updates were pretty sad. The only way they sustained themselves, and provided content, was through paid expansions. Essentially a "Subscription Fee" rolled up into an expansion for content.
I'd much rather have $15/month with free expansions like EVE. It's part of the reason EvE has sustained itself for so long. They have a superior business model . Or, at least in my opinion anyways.
Yes but in EvE can't you play for free by paying for said fee through ISK I do beleave they still do this right and if so why is there a need to pay a fee when you can play it for free. As for the whole is sub better then B2P well its been proven so many times even mirosoft said game companys dont need to charge a fee these days cause a server does not run that much to maintain as they used to. Also didn't WoW make 10 million+ a month off subs but only released small updates through the year all end game content and then an expansion every 3 or 4 years at start till the last 2 which are 1 year apart. As for if I spend money on a game to buy it I better be able to play it and sense I cant do that with a sub game unless I pay its not worth it to me cause as stated theres been a ton of games past and now that offer server side pay and dont charge a fee and have updates and so on in them as well even new games such as BF3, CoD, Boarderlands, and even Diablo is B2P they might not be mmo but are online games with constant running servers and dont charge me to play even Sacred 2 had open world play online and never had to pay to play on them. So your point here is we get more if we pay a monthly sub I can go play a F2P game and get all content for free and still enjoy the game at no cost cause they dont require you to buy anything even tho I do if the games good enough for me to pay alittle. So in closing your point makes no sense there where F2P/B2P way before they hit super big 6 years ago there have been F2P games sense the web started they where muds but free to play.
Yes, EvE did this correctly by allowing players to buy & trade EvE time cards essentially for real in-game isk. This allows a sort of balancing act to be done to minimize in-game inflation AND completely destroy Gold Farmers from making a project. Technically you're NOT playing for free, merely trading in-game currency you worked hard for in order to get time added to your account. CCP wins either way. Again, EvE is a P2P game, and the whole trading plex for isk does NOT modify that business model. It's merely a more in-depth P2P system.
No, the whole premise behind subscription costs is NOT for server run costs, but for development & quality customer service costs. It costs a LOT of money each month for:
-A main-backbone connection to their servers. That internet connection to support millions of players is EXPENSIVE as hell. Sometimes running more than $125,000 per month. Albeit chump-change for games like WoW, but not so much for games like Mortal Online, DAOC, etc.
-Developer payroll
-GM payroll (guides are volunteer, GMs are paid), also depends on the game sometimes.
-Customer Service that is actually half-decent.
-Advertisements
-Network Administrator Payroll
-Database Admin Payroll (sometimes are one & the same for Network Admins)
etc etc etc
There's a reason Blizzard recently sliced 600 positions due to WoW losing more than 2million subscribers since january of last year. It was a financial decision. B2P simply cannot support the kinds of numbers we're talking about for major MMOs. Now, if your MMO has under 500,000 unique logins per month then B2P MIGHT be feasable with a cosmetic ONLY cash-shop. However, subscription still remains king in terms of quality & content.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
the profits of B2P will blow every other model out of the water. people are tired of subs, and of F2P garbage. just the fact that GW2 is B2P will earn them hundreds of thousands, if not millions, more players. not to mention it's coming out on the consoles.
B2P with cosmetics microtransactions and B2P expansions is what most players want, and depending on how quickly they can crank out new content, a model that will make ANet very rich.
not only is it not a FATAL flaw, B2P is not a flaw in any way whatsoever. it's what most players want: tons of bang for the buck, without recurring fees. GW2 will make monthly fee models completely dead, if they arent dying already.
console mmos are always horrible, just look at champions/dcuo/everquest adventures/final fantasies
the console versions are always either 50% of the game the pc version was (eqa) or the pc version is gimped to 50% to keep it inline with consoles (the others)
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
/tiphat
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
the profits of B2P will blow every other model out of the water. people are tired of subs, and of F2P garbage. just the fact that GW2 is B2P will earn them hundreds of thousands, if not millions, more players. not to mention it's coming out on the consoles.
B2P with cosmetics microtransactions and B2P expansions is what most players want, and depending on how quickly they can crank out new content, a model that will make ANet very rich.
not only is it not a FATAL flaw, B2P is not a flaw in any way whatsoever. it's what most players want: tons of bang for the buck, without recurring fees. GW2 will make monthly fee models completely dead, if they arent dying already.
console mmos are always horrible, just look at champions/dcuo/everquest adventures/final fantasies
the console versions are always either 50% of the game the pc version was (eqa) or the pc version is gimped to 50% to keep it inline with consoles (the others)
A fine example would be DCUO. They originally tried to bring it to consoles, hence the horrible gameplay design, but then had to scrap it when they realized that Microsoft's Xbox-Live system is completely closed-in. In other words, Microsoft is a Nazi company that didn't wanted players to be able to interact with PC players.
A good article would be to read about how CCP made Dust 514 exclusive for PS3 when they realized that Xbox-Live wasn't going to let them do what they needed to interact with PC players.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
ok at least KNOW what you claim to know... all but one expanison came out 1 YEAR after its predecessor. The one difference was Factions which was followed by Night Fall ~6 months later. Factions was very small PVE but huge PVP, it actually had a PVP only purchase option if you didn't want the PVE content. 1 year between expansion I do not think is too soon... and it CERTAINLY isn't 2 months...
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
I am going out on a limb here as I do not know a huge amount about DCUO timeline but wasn't it's real issue the fact that the XBOX servers were packed, PC not and then it was shut down from the hacking for a month? I was certain this was why the game truely failed. I mean it isn't my cup of tea as a game but I could see it being fun for many and I actually enjoyed the playstyle (this is only from playing a week after it went F2P mind you).
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
ok at least KNOW what you claim to know... all but one expanison came out 1 YEAR after its predecessor. The one difference was Factions which was followed by Night Fall ~6 months later. Factions was very small PVE but huge PVP, it actually had a PVP only purchase option if you didn't want the PVE content. 1 year between expansion I do not think is too soon... and it CERTAINLY isn't 2 months...
Did they not also release other content during that time? Microtransaction wise? Player slots, etc? I was also under the impression some side content other than expansions were released. I could have been wrong.
But you made the mistake I was only referencing expansions. Also I said I didn't play GW 1 so that should tip you off that Im no expert on the subject. I had tried to make that clear.
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
ok at least KNOW what you claim to know... all but one expanison came out 1 YEAR after its predecessor. The one difference was Factions which was followed by Night Fall ~6 months later. Factions was very small PVE but huge PVP, it actually had a PVP only purchase option if you didn't want the PVE content. 1 year between expansion I do not think is too soon... and it CERTAINLY isn't 2 months...
Did they not also release other content during that time? Microtransaction wise? Player slots, etc? I was also under the impression some side content other than expansions were released. I could have been wrong.
But you made the mistake I was only referencing expansions. Also I said I didn't play GW 1 so that should tip you off that Im no expert on the subject. I had tried to make that clear.
they have one 10 dollar single player quest line that is lore + a way to get unique weapons
they have released what is called guild wars beyond for free, what that is is a series of pretty difficult quests after you complete that campaign's main story. This ends again is cosmetic gear or in Prophecies case weapons that go to your Hall of Monuments. This content was free(repeating).
What I was griping about was the what I do know part and rereading I think I jumped at you unfairly as this is a pet peeve for me.. ppl saying that we will have to pay for content every 3 months.
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
ok at least KNOW what you claim to know... all but one expanison came out 1 YEAR after its predecessor. The one difference was Factions which was followed by Night Fall ~6 months later. Factions was very small PVE but huge PVP, it actually had a PVP only purchase option if you didn't want the PVE content. 1 year between expansion I do not think is too soon... and it CERTAINLY isn't 2 months...
Did they not also release other content during that time? Microtransaction wise? Player slots, etc? I was also under the impression some side content other than expansions were released. I could have been wrong.
But you made the mistake I was only referencing expansions. Also I said I didn't play GW 1 so that should tip you off that Im no expert on the subject. I had tried to make that clear.
they have one 10 dollar single player quest line that is lore + a way to get unique weapons
they have released what is called guild wars beyond for free, what that is is a series of pretty difficult quests after you complete that campaign's main story. This ends again is cosmetic gear or in Prophecies case weapons that go to your Hall of Monuments. This content was free(repeating).
What I was griping about was the what I do know part and rereading I think I jumped at you unfairly as this is a pet peeve for me.. ppl saying that we will have to pay for content every 3 months.
Yea I have no idea how often the content released. It was a bad guess. I was just trying to make the point that I think Anet will make money in its own honest way, subs aren't needed, and we would in fact be voting with our wallets just through the release of content and buying that.
But I understand where you were coming from. Sorry for the misinfo or bad guess.
Voting with your wallet is one of the most useless ways to communicate. You are sending a message, but you never know what message is being received. The analysts who look at missing subscriptions can theorize why people are leaving all they want, but very rarely in those kinds of situations do the fixes implemented actually bring subscribers back or help with what's actually wrong with the game.
The developers know if people are playing their game or not. If people aren't playing, they probably won't be able to sell the next expansion, so they get roughly the same feedback as you would get when there is money involved.
But this really isn't the best way to communicate if you have issues :P
Yea I have no idea how often the content released. It was a bad guess. I was just trying to make the point that I think Anet will make money in its own honest way, subs aren't needed, and we would in fact be voting with our wallets just through the release of content and buying that.
But I understand where you were coming from. Sorry for the misinfo or bad guess.
np =D glad to help clear that up and def. ANET will make their money and it will be honestly done. I have an old dislike.. border on hatred for NCSoft but ANET pulls me in... good company and glad they keep NCSoft's mitts off their product =D When I started playing GW1 I was shocked at how mild and small the item shop actually was... I don't think there is another game like it out there.. not being B2P and being MMO or COPRPG with a small COSMETIC item shop.
The OP was not rude in the way he asked his question so I don't see why you are all jumping down his throat and insulting him.
what happened to mmorpgs gw2 community? 3 months ago it was all civil. Atleast the old regs still aren't drinkin the hatorade.
"You have some serious mental issues you may need to seek some help for. There are others who post things, but do not post them in the way you do. Out of every person who posts crazy shit in this forum, you have some of the craziest and scariest" -FarReach
Fatal flaw? No. In fact the way I see it is that through B2P, the developers have free reign to do what's best for the game instead of catering to the whims of some folks who refuse to learn to play. Just look at the raging at guildwars2guru over the traits. You want those folks to have something to sway developers into a particular direction that may not be good for the game? Or do you want the developers, who have experience and knowledge under their belts, to direct the game? I'm certain they enjoy feedback, but there is a such thing as crappy feedback as well.
Bingo... thanks for saving me the time of having to express the same idea.
They can stay true to their game without caving into majority rule... or a whiny, but vocal minority.
So once again I was roaming the forums today, and found an interesting idea pop into my head brought up in a different game forum thread. Oddly enough, GW2's B2P model popped in my head as a prime example of a Fatal Flaw that B2P has.
The General Idea:
Players cannot vote with their wallets in order to show developers that they're going down the wrong path with a new system, change, addition, etc etc to the game.
A Possible Solution?
The only thing that could REALLY be effective, in my opinion, would be if the developers of GW2 put a game-wide poll up after each major patch (similar to what Everquest's team is doing now, where you can vote in-game on polls) to get an idea of the overall player's opinion rather than hunting through threads filled with trolls on a forum.
What do you think? Is the inability for a player to REALLY make a voice with their wallet a highly fatal flaw of the B2P model, or do you think there are other ways (other than forums, since they almost never work in a positive manner) to counter this effect on development?
/tiphat
thats actually a good idea, while i think they will keep a reporting system a poll might be a good idea if it were in game as a reporting system that way they could keep the demographic data private as knowing that data can scew numbers by the voters. Also, i would be more inclined for them to use that in their testing servers than their main because that's where everything is tested before live.
Comments
B2P advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.
first off , subs where introduced back in the old days when bandwidth cost a lot more money then today, today it cost them pennies per player compared to dollars back in the day.
2nd they worry so much about all the whiners quitting that they give in to them and lose their focus on the game and often go down the wrong path.
With B2P if I wish to speak with my wallet I just dont buy expansions or shop items.
This. The subscription fee is a remnant of a time when bandwidth was actually expensive, producing content was much harder and the MMO market was only a fraction of what it is today.
Nowadays very few MMOs actually invest any significant fraction of their income on producing new content.
There is no logic to the OP.
Thankfully, many people have already stated why, so i will leave it at that.
What they will have is activity charting to tell them if people are playing or not. Combined with sales figures from the cash shop, ArenaNet will have a very powerful indicator available to them to tell them if people like any changes. If play activity drops off, so will cash shop sales, and I needn't remind you that cash shop sales are required for the game to survive. It's not something they can afford to ignore.
There you go, players voting with their wallets.
Then again, they might just do it the old fashion way and listen to what their community is saying. It seems they do that quite a lot even now, before we've even paid them a dime.
Yeah a very fatal flaw. They never sold 6.5 million units of the first game. The studio went broke and shut down. There will never ever be a sequel to this horrible fatally flawed GW1. Whoever uses B2P is doomed.
Life IS Feudal
Yes but in EvE can't you play for free by paying for said fee through ISK I do beleave they still do this right and if so why is there a need to pay a fee when you can play it for free. As for the whole is sub better then B2P well its been proven so many times even mirosoft said game companys dont need to charge a fee these days cause a server does not run that much to maintain as they used to. Also didn't WoW make 10 million+ a month off subs but only released small updates through the year all end game content and then an expansion every 3 or 4 years at start till the last 2 which are 1 year apart. As for if I spend money on a game to buy it I better be able to play it and sense I cant do that with a sub game unless I pay its not worth it to me cause as stated theres been a ton of games past and now that offer server side pay and dont charge a fee and have updates and so on in them as well even new games such as BF3, CoD, Boarderlands, and even Diablo is B2P they might not be mmo but are online games with constant running servers and dont charge me to play even Sacred 2 had open world play online and never had to pay to play on them. So your point here is we get more if we pay a monthly sub I can go play a F2P game and get all content for free and still enjoy the game at no cost cause they dont require you to buy anything even tho I do if the games good enough for me to pay alittle. So in closing your point makes no sense there where F2P/B2P way before they hit super big 6 years ago there have been F2P games sense the web started they where muds but free to play.
Sherman's Gaming
Youtube Content creator for The Elder Scrolls Online
Channel:http://https//www.youtube.com/channel/UCrgYNgpFTRAl4XWz31o2emw
I disagree.
For one, GW1 was also B2P and the developers were very responsive to what the players wanted. With GW2 Anet also seems to be just as (if not more so) responsive to feedback.
For two, I think this forum is a very good indicator of just how much players actually vote with their wallet. Hint: they don't. There's a very real trend of games coming out that have flaws showing pre-launch, people dump a lot of money into it, and then complain later when it's not what they expected. There are so many examples of just how little the subscription model actually does for a game, I'm not sure it's even worth counting.
As far as B2P becoming an industry standard, I think you're points are a lot more valid. The system really relies on the developers reputation, and them being concerned enough with it to keep generating quality content. I don't think enough developers actually do this, though. This is one of those cases, where some clever individuals had an idea they wanted to make, and found an edge that allowed them to do so. It's unconventional, but it's done in an intellgent way, and thus it works.
You still vote with your wallet, there will be new expansion every year or so, if you didn´t like what have been going on you wont buy that.
Besides, GW1 already have had polls, I remember doing one for "War in Kryta". Making one after every patch is counter productive though, there will mostly be whine over nerfs anyways, and someone have to work on all that feedback.
Yes, EvE did this correctly by allowing players to buy & trade EvE time cards essentially for real in-game isk. This allows a sort of balancing act to be done to minimize in-game inflation AND completely destroy Gold Farmers from making a project. Technically you're NOT playing for free, merely trading in-game currency you worked hard for in order to get time added to your account. CCP wins either way. Again, EvE is a P2P game, and the whole trading plex for isk does NOT modify that business model. It's merely a more in-depth P2P system.
No, the whole premise behind subscription costs is NOT for server run costs, but for development & quality customer service costs. It costs a LOT of money each month for:
-A main-backbone connection to their servers. That internet connection to support millions of players is EXPENSIVE as hell. Sometimes running more than $125,000 per month. Albeit chump-change for games like WoW, but not so much for games like Mortal Online, DAOC, etc.
-Developer payroll
-GM payroll (guides are volunteer, GMs are paid), also depends on the game sometimes.
-Customer Service that is actually half-decent.
-Advertisements
-Network Administrator Payroll
-Database Admin Payroll (sometimes are one & the same for Network Admins)
etc etc etc
There's a reason Blizzard recently sliced 600 positions due to WoW losing more than 2million subscribers since january of last year. It was a financial decision. B2P simply cannot support the kinds of numbers we're talking about for major MMOs. Now, if your MMO has under 500,000 unique logins per month then B2P MIGHT be feasable with a cosmetic ONLY cash-shop. However, subscription still remains king in terms of quality & content.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
console mmos are always horrible, just look at champions/dcuo/everquest adventures/final fantasies
the console versions are always either 50% of the game the pc version was (eqa) or the pc version is gimped to 50% to keep it inline with consoles (the others)
Having not played Guild Wars 1 what I do know is they release expansions often, as well as arenas, dungeons, and other content on the side. Instead of paying a sub fee for the promise of content, you pay for the content as its actually released and then pay for that. If you want too that is.
So the buying with your wallet certainly applies here. If people aren't buying the expansions or content they are creating, it sends a clear message. Also, they will be fully aware of how many people are really playing every day or not. And yes, they want people playing. As many as possible. So as many as possible will buy the new content that comes out 2 months from then.
Its a different and far more player friendly system. Its how Anet hopes to make its money with GW2. Im sure they'll make plenty of it. By us voting with our wallets.
A fine example would be DCUO. They originally tried to bring it to consoles, hence the horrible gameplay design, but then had to scrap it when they realized that Microsoft's Xbox-Live system is completely closed-in. In other words, Microsoft is a Nazi company that didn't wanted players to be able to interact with PC players.
A good article would be to read about how CCP made Dust 514 exclusive for PS3 when they realized that Xbox-Live wasn't going to let them do what they needed to interact with PC players.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
ok at least KNOW what you claim to know... all but one expanison came out 1 YEAR after its predecessor. The one difference was Factions which was followed by Night Fall ~6 months later. Factions was very small PVE but huge PVP, it actually had a PVP only purchase option if you didn't want the PVE content. 1 year between expansion I do not think is too soon... and it CERTAINLY isn't 2 months...
I am going out on a limb here as I do not know a huge amount about DCUO timeline but wasn't it's real issue the fact that the XBOX servers were packed, PC not and then it was shut down from the hacking for a month? I was certain this was why the game truely failed. I mean it isn't my cup of tea as a game but I could see it being fun for many and I actually enjoyed the playstyle (this is only from playing a week after it went F2P mind you).
Did they not also release other content during that time? Microtransaction wise? Player slots, etc? I was also under the impression some side content other than expansions were released. I could have been wrong.
But you made the mistake I was only referencing expansions. Also I said I didn't play GW 1 so that should tip you off that Im no expert on the subject. I had tried to make that clear.
they have one 10 dollar single player quest line that is lore + a way to get unique weapons
they have released what is called guild wars beyond for free, what that is is a series of pretty difficult quests after you complete that campaign's main story. This ends again is cosmetic gear or in Prophecies case weapons that go to your Hall of Monuments. This content was free(repeating).
What I was griping about was the what I do know part and rereading I think I jumped at you unfairly as this is a pet peeve for me.. ppl saying that we will have to pay for content every 3 months.
What he said
Said... like a true... DOVAHKIIN!!!!!
Yea I have no idea how often the content released. It was a bad guess. I was just trying to make the point that I think Anet will make money in its own honest way, subs aren't needed, and we would in fact be voting with our wallets just through the release of content and buying that.
But I understand where you were coming from. Sorry for the misinfo or bad guess.
Voting with your wallet is one of the most useless ways to communicate. You are sending a message, but you never know what message is being received. The analysts who look at missing subscriptions can theorize why people are leaving all they want, but very rarely in those kinds of situations do the fixes implemented actually bring subscribers back or help with what's actually wrong with the game.
The developers know if people are playing their game or not. If people aren't playing, they probably won't be able to sell the next expansion, so they get roughly the same feedback as you would get when there is money involved.
But this really isn't the best way to communicate if you have issues :P
np =D glad to help clear that up and def. ANET will make their money and it will be honestly done. I have an old dislike.. border on hatred for NCSoft but ANET pulls me in... good company and glad they keep NCSoft's mitts off their product =D When I started playing GW1 I was shocked at how mild and small the item shop actually was... I don't think there is another game like it out there.. not being B2P and being MMO or COPRPG with a small COSMETIC item shop.
The OP was not rude in the way he asked his question so I don't see why you are all jumping down his throat and insulting him.
what happened to mmorpgs gw2 community? 3 months ago it was all civil. Atleast the old regs still aren't drinkin the hatorade.
"You have some serious mental issues you may need to seek some help for. There are others who post things, but do not post them in the way you do. Out of every person who posts crazy shit in this forum, you have some of the craziest and scariest" -FarReach
I didn't read all five pages but I read over half and didnt find any bad negative stuff... I thought it was a pretty mild and well debated thread TBH
Bingo... thanks for saving me the time of having to express the same idea.
They can stay true to their game without caving into majority rule... or a whiny, but vocal minority.
Which forums have you been visiting?
This is all par for the course across every game forum that sees a lot of traffic. Hell, this has been pretty tame.
thats actually a good idea, while i think they will keep a reporting system a poll might be a good idea if it were in game as a reporting system that way they could keep the demographic data private as knowing that data can scew numbers by the voters. Also, i would be more inclined for them to use that in their testing servers than their main because that's where everything is tested before live.