For the record no one is going to make a game without a profit motive see, that is how the world works, it is why people do anything. No profit, no game, period, end of story. They don't owe you a game. They're providing a service you can compensate them for it and the service will continue, or you can not and the service will be cancelled.
Reading these boards and people whining about greedy devs drives me freaking mad. Subs are the way to go. If you can't afford a sub you shouldn't be playing, you should be working a second job.
I would like to disagree with the first part, in particular the highlighted section. Musicians make music without a profit motive. I do everyday. I spend more money in gas than I receive in payment for shows quite often because I love the art I do. I love providing an art that some deeply enjoy. I understand a solo musician is much different than a company developing a game. But I disagree that profit is the only thing driving creation. I also know and accept that my mind lives in a fantasy "perfect world", I just wish game designers would retain the artist within. I do know if you just create without worrying about profit (though in a major development cycle this is impossible) you will open yourself to create something far more impressive than when creating with deadlines, suit pressure, and worrying about future profit margins. Maybe I am just wishing some major devs/pubs could find a better balance. This is all wishful thinking, I know. This is why I really like the heart of Mark Jacobs. Though the heavy emphasis on a lack of PvE is turning me off of Camelot Unchained, it is a very refreshing idea in this growing commercial industry.
I do agree with you that subs are the way to go. I'd rather subscribe and give my $15 a month.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
That is exactly right. The investors typically don't play the games.
You've made that claim several times about both investors and CEOs, and I really would like to know which investors and CEOs you are talking about. Could you name the ones you are referring to?
Hmm. I think I've said that once...about investors.
How about you tell me how many gamers you see there...go ahead guess.
Yeah, I could have googled that, too, but that doesn't answer the question. Look, if you made up that fact, that's fine. No need to feel ashamed, Iselin.
Yes. You could have googled it. But you didn't. Because as usual, you just want to spout nonsense and bait.
Are you saying that wall street investment companies and mutual funds are made up of gamers that care about the games and pressure EA and Activision to provide a qulaity gaming experience? That's quite an assumption. I would think the onus would be on you to prove such an outlandish idea.
+1 combating a probability should require the evidence, not claiming the probable.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Greedy companies and cheap players. Players cry about subs, get their f2p model, finally understand this becomes more expensive than p2p, and whine about it.
Who is whining about it?
F2P is free .. for me. I am very happy to get that model.
Never pay a cent. Never will pay a cent. Works out real well.
I understand what you say about expenses. But seeing the #s and estimated revenue for Everquest, they clearly did not spend $300 million on development. So why with significantly less budget, was Everquest able to create a much larger, in depth world capable of sustaining players for significantly longer than SWTOR? Are developers focusing on the wrong features? Does spending millions on VOers really pay off? Are games simply mismanaged in development?
Sure there are multiple business models, all of which should theoretically be expanded on the original model UO, AC and EQ had. If this is the case, should these models not be more efficient? Should they not be capable of producing large revenues from smaller customer bases? If not, they certainly should be capable of producing more profit, or else it would be insanity to use these newer models.
Well, first off, that 8 million would be more like 10.5+ million the year that SWToR launched. Still, there is other money to account for.
You have to ask yourself, what was the scope of each game? Since SWToR was trying for something different it's hard to compare them.
On top of that, look at the rise in salaries, benefits, tools/software, etc. I understand that tinkering with the engine used in SWToR caused a lot of issues and extra costs.
Bad management could be a part of it as well.
You just can't compare the two as they are apples to oranges.
Also, remember, profit is different from revenue (as quizzical said). Also know that profit isn't just the company's cut of the revenue. Profit comes from reducing costs as well,
If a game makes a lot of money but they have to pay out a lot of money then that's not going to be sustainable.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
For the record no one is going to make a game without a profit motive see, that is how the world works, it is why people do anything. No profit, no game, period, end of story. They don't owe you a game. They're providing a service you can compensate them for it and the service will continue, or you can not and the service will be cancelled.
Reading these boards and people whining about greedy devs drives me freaking mad. Subs are the way to go. If you can't afford a sub you shouldn't be playing, you should be working a second job.
I would like to disagree with the first part, in particular the highlighted section. Musicians make music without a profit motive. I do everyday. I spend more money in gas than I receive in payment for shows quite often because I love the art I do. I love providing an art that some deeply enjoy. I understand a solo musician is much different than a company developing a game. But I disagree that profit is the only thing driving creation. I also know and accept that my mind lives in a fantasy "perfect world", I just wish game designers would retain the artist within.
You can do something on a $1000 budget without a profit motive. $10 million? That's rather harder, as the only real way to pull that off is to convince people that you're a worthwhile charity or an important government project.
Comments
I would like to disagree with the first part, in particular the highlighted section. Musicians make music without a profit motive. I do everyday. I spend more money in gas than I receive in payment for shows quite often because I love the art I do. I love providing an art that some deeply enjoy. I understand a solo musician is much different than a company developing a game. But I disagree that profit is the only thing driving creation. I also know and accept that my mind lives in a fantasy "perfect world", I just wish game designers would retain the artist within. I do know if you just create without worrying about profit (though in a major development cycle this is impossible) you will open yourself to create something far more impressive than when creating with deadlines, suit pressure, and worrying about future profit margins. Maybe I am just wishing some major devs/pubs could find a better balance. This is all wishful thinking, I know. This is why I really like the heart of Mark Jacobs. Though the heavy emphasis on a lack of PvE is turning me off of Camelot Unchained, it is a very refreshing idea in this growing commercial industry.
I do agree with you that subs are the way to go. I'd rather subscribe and give my $15 a month.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
+1 combating a probability should require the evidence, not claiming the probable.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Who is whining about it?
F2P is free .. for me. I am very happy to get that model.
Never pay a cent. Never will pay a cent. Works out real well.
Well, first off, that 8 million would be more like 10.5+ million the year that SWToR launched. Still, there is other money to account for.
You have to ask yourself, what was the scope of each game? Since SWToR was trying for something different it's hard to compare them.
On top of that, look at the rise in salaries, benefits, tools/software, etc. I understand that tinkering with the engine used in SWToR caused a lot of issues and extra costs.
Bad management could be a part of it as well.
You just can't compare the two as they are apples to oranges.
Also, remember, profit is different from revenue (as quizzical said). Also know that profit isn't just the company's cut of the revenue. Profit comes from reducing costs as well,
If a game makes a lot of money but they have to pay out a lot of money then that's not going to be sustainable.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
You can do something on a $1000 budget without a profit motive. $10 million? That's rather harder, as the only real way to pull that off is to convince people that you're a worthwhile charity or an important government project.