Yeah, I do think that is a negative aspect of the revenue model and a good point. In general I've had a harder time connecting with core game communities over the last few years. I had a great guild in Rift for over a year that just evaporated over the course of a week. It was weird and really took the piss out of the game for me which is a testament to how important that aspect is in MMOs. On the other hand, I've been in a guild in EQ2 since 2008. They let me come and go as I wish (I take breaks from the game for months at a time) and we still get on great. Go figure. Did I have a point lol.
That is my problem with guilds. I was in a raid guild before, and there was too much work, and too much commitment.
We are playing a game here, and why do i let others control my fun? That is why i think more solo content is good, LFR is good (for me).
I try and avoid single game guilds now because of this same reason. I've been a member of an online community since 2005 and even though I change games or stop playing a game that some friends still want to keep playing we're always part of the same community and still run into each other in games all the time. This community appoints a guild leader for each new game and they go about setting up a guild for everyone. So really you're never looking for a new guild you just join the communities guild in that game.
They're also always just a room or two away on the voice server ( we have a 500 person server that all games/guilds use ) so they're never really just gone like what so often happens in games.
I know there are lots of communities like this now and it's becoming more and more popular for people who want to stay connected and be part of the social aspects of guilds to join this way instead of each new game being a new begining.
Originally posted by Torvaldr Yeah, I do think that is a negative aspect of the revenue model and a good point. In general I've had a harder time connecting with core game communities over the last few years. I had a great guild in Rift for over a year that just evaporated over the course of a week. It was weird and really took the piss out of the game for me which is a testament to how important that aspect is in MMOs. On the other hand, I've been in a guild in EQ2 since 2008. They let me come and go as I wish (I take breaks from the game for months at a time) and we still get on great. Go figure. Did I have a point lol.
Its really the only legitimate thing imo where a revenue model can affect community. I think all the other stuff people throw out like monetary commitments or age or vanity items instead of crafting (me) affect different aspects of the game or are just coming out sideways from some other frustration.
Rift caved real quick for me as well. I still don't quite understand what happened. Its like everyone in my guild just burned out simultaneously a few months after storm legion.
I try and avoid single game guilds now because of this same reason. I've been a member of an online community since 2005 and even though I change games or stop playing a game that some friends still want to keep playing we're always part of the same community and still run into each other in games all the time. This community appoints a guild leader for each new game and they go about setting up a guild for everyone. So really you're never looking for a new guild you just join the communities guild in that game.
They're also always just a room or two away on the voice server ( we have a 500 person server that all games/guilds use ) so they're never really just gone like what so often happens in games.
I know there are lots of communities like this now and it's becoming more and more popular for people who want to stay connected and be part of the social aspects of guilds to join this way instead of each new game being a new begining.
I could have worded that a lot better. My apologies.
They don't boot my character(s) after long periods of absence. I should have said, they are perfectly fine with me coming and going as I please and always are friendly and inviting when I return. A good portion of them do raid and I am welcome, but they never tell what to do or try and control my online time or how I play. They're just nice people that have a solid guild and that's a rare thing to me.
I also hate when people try and dictate how I should spend my gaming time and how I should play which is a major factor in me not raiding anymore. That isn't only true of raiding guilds though. There are a lot of small to medium guilds with aspirations of greatness that have this vision how the guild and members will work. They've always seemed pretty controlling to me too. PvP guilds and most guilds that bill themselves as "hardcore" fit this ticket.
I don't care if a guild is single game or multi-game as long as the experience is friendly and personal. I'm not a huge fan of joining mega guilds, answering website recruitment forms, real money guild dues, or anything as a formal real life club. I like more personal guild interaction.
I understood what you meant I just quoted it all to keep it relevant to what we were talking about, it is kind of off topic
Mega guilds sure have some down sides...like it's hard to get away from people you don't like when they're part of the same community and show up game after game :P
I mostly stay in mine because of the reasons I listed. Meeting up with old friends and it's an easy way to stay in touch with people you do like playing with. Joining a guild in a new game and knowing 80% of the people in it already is the most appealing thing they offer to me.
The hoops you have to jump though like you mention are for sure some of the negatives.
Narius has been quite clear on many occasions that he doesn't play for community. He plays purely for the game play and he seems to play mostly free and that's okay for him. I'm not that way. How long I stay with a game and if I return at some point are heavily dependent on how well I click with the community. As a result how much I spend over time is influenced by that. So my long term revenue projection for SoE games is very much dependent on my game community. I don't think I'm alone in that either.
Raph Koster made a point about cash grabs (either in the AMA or the "why fanboism is bad" thread) and how some studios know they have a short burner and so go for the quick revenue return. How much of the projected $2.5Bn is based on quick revenue or trying to build long term community in a revenue model that is very churn friendly? How successful is P2P just because of community? Those are relevant I think in the larger market discussion.
Clearly neither of us are alone.
But don't you think that the now quite dominant f2p model is evidence that not many players are willing to pay a premium to have stable games?
Originally posted by Atis-nobFree players in F2P pay too. Basically they work as advanced NPC for whales: prey to be killed by premium sword, losers to be compared with for those who bought cute skin, grind accelerator and mount. Some players don't mind being toys for rich, others pay or create 10000th thread about bad f2p.
Of the hundred or so F2P games, can you name about a dozen or so where you can buy gear superior to what can be obtained in game? Do you realize how much of your post is simply regurgitated talking points that you have not done any research or fact checking on?I get it, you have a hatred for people who play differently than you. Some people are just like that and I'm not about to try to sway you from your course at all. However - and this is just my advice to you as a fellow poster - your vitriol would bite better if you were actually stating something remotely based in reality.
"Facts" here are like Candyman. If you say it 3 times it becomes true. Of course if you posture with hatred from a soapbox you only need to say it once.
I just don't get where the hate comes from. Does someone actually wake up one day and say, "Hey I just realized I'm playing a full on pvp game where people can buy a huge advantage over me and I never realized it."
I would really love to see complete revenue metrics for games. I know there are "whales" and "freeloaders", but I have a hard time believing that 2% of the players mainly fund a game. It's just too volatile and subject to fluctuations. It makes more sense to me that there are curves of high spenders to low. I also think the shape of that curve is highly dependent on the game style, cash shop setup, and demographics. So not every game is going to be shaped the same. It would be even more interesting to see a bunch of games plotted and how their curves relate or are dissimilar. But since I have no proof or access to data I can't support my supposition.
My guess would be that it is based on high turnover. That 2% of high spenders is constantly being rotated in and out. You find out about a F2P game, it hooks you one weekend and you blow 50 bucks on some stuff to make it more fun, then burnout and move on.
Maybe its like that, maybe not. Seems possible.
Turnover definitely comes into play, which explains the number of about 40% spending on F2P games as a whole, but ~10% in each game spending at any given time in a particular game. The churn is probably higher than sub games for a variety of reasons but i don't know if it's that much higher. High churn would mean A LOT more people are spending in F2P games than previously thought.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Originally posted by Torvaldr As our online connectivity and interaction matures I think how we pay for and access entertainment will also grudgingly follow. Think how much more robust the internet is now compared to 15 years ago. So what we see today in F2P and P2P won't be the same in 5 to 10 years.
I think that magical 15 bucks a month is purely an intrinsic value at this point. However, it becomes validated with every f2p cash grab mmo that crawls out of the woodwork. Obviously thats not every f2p mmo, in fact Id say its in the minority. But it does lend to the payment model begrudgingly moving forward with technology.
Originally posted by Torvaldr Originally posted by FoomerangOriginally posted by TorvaldrAs our online connectivity and interaction matures I think how we pay for and access entertainment will also grudgingly follow. Think how much more robust the internet is now compared to 15 years ago. So what we see today in F2P and P2P won't be the same in 5 to 10 years.
I think that magical 15 bucks a month is purely an intrinsic value at this point. However, it becomes validated with every f2p cash grab mmo that crawls out of the woodwork. Obviously thats not every f2p mmo, in fact Id say its in the minority. But it does lend to the payment model begrudgingly moving forward with technology.Agreed. On top of that I think as much as we all say we like change, we are much more comfortable and secure with what we know. The place you don't want to stand out from the crowd is being more expensive. If a dev/pub actually created a super excellent game (you know the dream game thingy) but charged $25 a month for it I think it would be as well received as we would like to think. Not because it might not be worth it, but because differentiating amongst other businesses by asking for more money will be a focus point.
Yeah. I think all this stuff will normalize sooner than later. Right now, its all new territory. SO many platforms, so many ways to pay. Nothing is standardized. You see all kinds of extremes being abused at the same time as something really worth the price being ignored. Im thinking of the bang for your buck for Rift right now as one example. And another is the triple dip Funcom did when they launched TSW. Day one DLC tactics by EA and the like. GW2 providing regular and frequent content updates on a box price with a small footprint cash shop.
Its just all over the place right now. To make predictions about almost anything is premature haha. Makes for interesting discussions though.
Not if i play pve solo. No whales ever killed me because of that.
Now i am not opposed to the idea of being advanced NPC .. it is only fair since i got a free game, and whales pay through their nose.
However, i don't play pvp at all ... so the whales just have to do without me.
My post is so short and still you didn't manage to finish it. I mentioned another option to pay for free game, which, I think, totally suits your situation. You work as reference loser. No offense, I played f2p too and was in same role. Whales can feel good by comparing themselves with us. Its ok for you, since you play MMO as single player game, but not ok for me, since I play in community and for challenge and being constantly handicapped isn't fun. Plus all these reminders - you can buy this, you can buy that - ruin my immersion.
Originally posted by Loktofeit
Of the hundred or so F2P games, can you name about a dozen or so where you can buy gear superior to what can be obtained in game? Do you realize how much of your post is simply regurgitated talking points that you have not done any research or fact checking on?
I get it, you have a hatred for people who play differently than you. Some people are just like that and I'm not about to try to sway you from your course at all. However - and this is just my advice to you as a fellow poster - your vitriol would bite better if you were actually stating something remotely based in reality.
It seems, on your crusade vs imaginary haters you don't bother to notice that your definitions don't work outside of your head. Players don't need to buy superior cash-only weapon to pwn noobs, they just need to buy normal superior weapon right now. With short lifecycle of current MMO and trend to ignore balance, you can change rules every 2 months, making another piece of equipment best of the best. Ppl who grind for it will get it right before next nerf, while ppl, who buy current easymode toy on day 1, will have advantage 90% of all time. Count in other things, which can be bought and we get a whale with year worth of cool items, which he got in a 5 mins. It's done very well and subtle in Planetside2, much worse - in asian grinders.
I don't say its absolute no-no, its a fair business model. Only thing I say, thats there is no free part in F2P, everybody pays, even narui, even if he doesn't notice.
Everything else you "get" about my "hatred" is in your imagination. Advice to you as a fellow poster - run reality check on yourself more often, or else you wont be able to discern "something remotely based in reality" being too deep in your dreamy war vs infidels.
Originally posted by Torvaldr
I just don't get where the hate comes from. Does someone actually wake up one day and say, "Hey I just realized I'm playing a full on pvp game where people can buy a huge advantage over me and I never realized it."
It comes from desire to find hate and show off by fighting it with a "voice of reason"
"it’s clear that Sony has no intention of slowing down, setting its sights on claiming a piece of the free-to-play MMO market. Our early estimates for the US market put the total spending for 2013E at $2.5 billion, growing 57% year-over-year."
"said John Smedley: There is no purer way to see whether you have a good game or not than by saying 'this is free, do you want to play it?'"
Lol. Such fake numbers. Well.. as long as they count MOBAs to MMOs everything sounds fine. I really would be interested in the real F2P MMO numbers, and even more interesting would be the real F2P Western MMO numbers. Because there is no superior doing western F2P MMO.. the best may be some of the 101 games, or LoTRO or SWtoR or Planetside 2?
Maybe EQN may change that.. but we will see. F2P is a extremely good payment model for multiplayer only games, like MOBAs or Multiplayer only FPS games(TF2, Battlefield Heroes), but it don't do that well for MMOs in the west. Nevertheless some mixed payment models will be the future, if you like it or not does not matter.
On the other side what MMO after WoW did incredible well? GW2 may be one exception, but beside of that almost every game have dissapointed in some way or the other.. hopefully that trend will change sometimes soon, and a worthy MMO will appear and get the success it deserves. WoW is declining and that trend will not stop either.. we need a new king, or better a handful of well doing MMOs around.. diversity would be the best for everyone.. i really don't want to see another decade focusing on just one MMO model.
I mentioned another option to pay for free game, which, I think, totally suits your situation. You work as reference loser. No offense, I played f2p too and was in same role. Whales can feel good by comparing themselves with us. Its ok for you, since you play MMO as single player game, but not ok for me, since I play in community and for challenge and being constantly handicapped isn't fun. Plus all these reminders - you can buy this, you can buy that - ruin my immersion.
Totally ok for me. But here is one more point ..
there is a lot of complaints about how easy MMOs are ... so some handicapped is not a bad thing at all. I never buy any p2w items, or power up items, and i never have a problem in pve f2p games.
So those items are not only unnecessarily, but probably will make the game LESS fun.
I just don't get where the hate comes from. Does someone actually wake up one day and say, "Hey I just realized I'm playing a full on pvp game where people can buy a huge advantage over me and I never realized it."
It comes from desire to find hate and show off by fighting it with a "voice of reason"
Once I managed to translate this, it actually gave me a good laugh.
Originally posted by nariusseldonhttp://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/everquest-next-claim-free-to-play-mmo/"its clear that Sony has no intention of slowing down, setting its sights on claiming a piece of the free-to-play MMO market. Our early estimates for the US market put the total spending for 2013E at $2.5 billion, growing 57% year-over-year.""said John Smedley: There is no purer way to see whether you have a good game or not than by saying 'this is free, do you want to play it?'"
Lol. Such fake numbers. Well.. as long as they count MOBAs to MMOs everything sounds fine. I really would be interested in the real F2P MMO numbers, and even more interesting would be the real F2P Western MMO numbers. Because there is no superior doing western F2P MMO.. the best may be some of the 101 games, or LoTRO or SWtoR or Planetside 2?
Maybe EQN may change that.. but we will see. F2P is a extremely good payment model for multiplayer only games, like MOBAs or Multiplayer only FPS games(TF2, Battlefield Heroes), but it don't do that well for MMOs in the west. Nevertheless some mixed payment models will be the future, if you like it or not does not matter.
On the other side what MMO after WoW did incredible well? GW2 may be one exception, but beside of that almost every game have dissapointed in some way or the other.. hopefully that trend will change sometimes soon, and a worthy MMO will appear and get the success it deserves. WoW is declining and that trend will not stop either.. we need a new king, or better a handful of well doing MMOs around.. diversity would be the best for everyone.. i really don't want to see another decade focusing on just one MMO model.
MOBAs are MMOs. They aren't MMORPGs.
**
The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
Yeh .. that is pretty standard now. Multiple industry analytics sites include MOBAs in MMOs.
Then shouldn't you include games like call of duty as well or any multiplayer game online? What is the threshold of a MMO now? Or should we just call them MO's
The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
Yeh .. that is pretty standard now. Multiple industry analytics sites include MOBAs in MMOs.
Then shouldn't you include games like call of duty as well or any multiplayer game online? What is the threshold of a MMO now? Or should we just call them MO's
I wouldn't mind since CoD is more massive than a 5-man dungeon.
However, it is just convenient conventional usage. It is not logical. People don't agree with the logic anyway. Just look at it as an arbitrary collection of online games.
there is a lot of complaints about how easy MMOs are ... so some handicapped is not a bad thing at all. I never buy any p2w items, or power up items, and i never have a problem in pve f2p games.
So those items are not only unnecessarily, but probably will make the game LESS fun.
They handicap ppl in comparison to other players. Its a bad thing for those who interacts with other community not only in chat.
Including MOBAs in MMO is just current fad among ignorant journalists, same as calling every online service e-cloud. No need to follow them for those who dont get money from it, like this site.
Originally posted by nariusseldonhttp://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/everquest-next-claim-free-to-play-mmo/"it’s clear that Sony has no intention of slowing down, setting its sights on claiming a piece of the free-to-play MMO market. Our early estimates for the US market put the total spending for 2013E at $2.5 billion, growing 57% year-over-year.""said John Smedley: There is no purer way to see whether you have a good game or not than by saying 'this is free, do you want to play it?'"
Lol. Such fake numbers. Well.. as long as they count MOBAs to MMOs everything sounds fine. I really would be interested in the real F2P MMO numbers, and even more interesting would be the real F2P Western MMO numbers. Because there is no superior doing western F2P MMO.. the best may be some of the 101 games, or LoTRO or SWtoR or Planetside 2?
Maybe EQN may change that.. but we will see. F2P is a extremely good payment model for multiplayer only games, like MOBAs or Multiplayer only FPS games(TF2, Battlefield Heroes), but it don't do that well for MMOs in the west. Nevertheless some mixed payment models will be the future, if you like it or not does not matter.
On the other side what MMO after WoW did incredible well? GW2 may be one exception, but beside of that almost every game have dissapointed in some way or the other.. hopefully that trend will change sometimes soon, and a worthy MMO will appear and get the success it deserves. WoW is declining and that trend will not stop either.. we need a new king, or better a handful of well doing MMOs around.. diversity would be the best for everyone.. i really don't want to see another decade focusing on just one MMO model.
MOBAs are MMOs. They aren't MMORPGs.
**
The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
Ok.. 5vs5 is nowadays Massive Multiplayer? With that said... every other Multiplayer game is then a MMO, too. Why not throw in Starcraft into the equation.
Originally posted by Apraxis Originally posted by lizardbonesOriginally posted by ApraxisOriginally posted by nariusseldonhttp://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/everquest-next-claim-free-to-play-mmo/"its clear that Sony has no intention of slowing down, setting its sights on claiming a piece of the free-to-play MMO market. Our early estimates for the US market put the total spending for 2013E at $2.5 billion, growing 57% year-over-year.""said John Smedley: There is no purer way to see whether you have a good game or not than by saying 'this is free, do you want to play it?'"
Lol. Such fake numbers. Well.. as long as they count MOBAs to MMOs everything sounds fine. I really would be interested in the real F2P MMO numbers, and even more interesting would be the real F2P Western MMO numbers. Because there is no superior doing western F2P MMO.. the best may be some of the 101 games, or LoTRO or SWtoR or Planetside 2?Maybe EQN may change that.. but we will see. F2P is a extremely good payment model for multiplayer only games, like MOBAs or Multiplayer only FPS games(TF2, Battlefield Heroes), but it don't do that well for MMOs in the west. Nevertheless some mixed payment models will be the future, if you like it or not does not matter.On the other side what MMO after WoW did incredible well? GW2 may be one exception, but beside of that almost every game have dissapointed in some way or the other.. hopefully that trend will change sometimes soon, and a worthy MMO will appear and get the success it deserves. WoW is declining and that trend will not stop either.. we need a new king, or better a handful of well doing MMOs around.. diversity would be the best for everyone.. i really don't want to see another decade focusing on just one MMO model. MOBAs are MMOs. They aren't MMORPGs. ** The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us. Ok.. 5vs5 is nowadays Massive Multiplayer? With that said... every other Multiplayer game is then a MMO, too. Why not throw in Starcraft into the equation.
The gaming industry and gamers in general have settled on those games being MMOs. *shrug* You are welcome to make up your own definition. Your definition will be ignored everywhere but this one place on the internet, where 200 to 300 people post every day, but you're welcome to do it.
Again, the industry in general isn't obsessed with MMORPGs being anything in particular. That really is just us and the small handful of websites focused on MMORPGs. Everyone else cares about video games, not MMORPGs in particular.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
I hope that we have to pay for each life we use as a character; I would really like to see a move back to the arcade era. I really liked the fact that when I died playing Pac Man I had to pay more money to keep playing the game.
I think that the MMO market is moving in the right direction. Game companies should offer the gameplay for free and allow the user to purchase things like allowing their character to have running animations and animations for when a character jumps: purely cosmetic things.
I really enjoy free to play games, and I enjoy them because said games allow me to play it my way. Free to play games do not force me to pay for cosmetic things that I find useless like spell effects or textures. Instead, I can get the important stuff for FREE (how awesome is that)!
Anyways, I am really looking forward to EQ: Next because I believe that it will everything that I am looking for in a game. I have always wanted to play an eight foot tall Ogre character with charmingly good looks that could sneak up on people and assassinate them, and no game has allowed me to do something like this before. I believe that EQ: Next will be the next WoW killer.
Pay to have a running animation? So if you don't buy the animation your character moves like they do in South Park? Smed also said he will charging for Ogres by the foot so your eight foot tall one might be pretty pricey
Ah, yes, but these things are all cosmetic! Do you not see the beauty of the choice that we now have!
I wouldn't waste a single minute playing a game that charged me for running animations.. Nickel and diming sucks in MMOs and your ideas are the worste that I've seen. I hope you are just trolling.
I think that you are missing out on how awesome this is though. Running animations are not fundamental to gameplay; they are purely cosmetic. I can not tell you how many times I have purchased a game for 60$ and the running animations were just terrible, yet I still had to pay for them even though I did not want them.
By allowing users to play the GAME for free and putting all of the COSMETIC stuff into microtransaction form it allows the players to PLAY IT THEIR WAY. There are so many useless things that game companies have MADE players pay for even though the player may not want that particular thing. Who is to say that every player wants to pay for running animations or textures or shaders?
Free to play is one of the best things to happen to the game industry in a very long time.
Hmm..Running animations ...Let me tell you something ..Running animations SHOULD BE PART OF THE GAME, they could be good or bad but they should be PART OF THE GAME, unless there is no running in the game. Paying for extra bagspace or such things i can understand but paying for "nice running animations" ??? Running animations is NOT some "COSMETIC stuff"..
Don't really know if you are trying your best to "troll" in this thread but this has got to be the most stupid argument I have ever seen in terms of a F2P discussion. It shows how bad it really is to sell half a game as microtransactions ...
If you really want to play a game , you will pay for it ...sure there will ALWAYS be parts in that game that doesn't suit your particular preferences or needs, me for example , I don't care for all the achivement hysteria that is present in every single game, yet they are there because alot of folks do them obviously.
IMO if I play a game ...I would like to experience the whole gameworld without odd restrictions, i would just Close and uninstall a game that told me to visit the store once i pressed the shift key, certain activities in a game I do not do, but i'm still thinking they are good since they are PART OF THE COMPLETE PACKAGE.
FTP games are a plague that infects this gaming era with bad ideas like this...A free to play game can't be produced with the same amount of funding as a AAA title does , because of that the game and gameplay suffer and will only be a Shell of a game, an idea or a beta test if you will, and it will continue to be that game until it get's enough sales in their shop to make small improvements. But until that happens ...well then half of it's population will be gone to some other shitty FTP title.
If you have a GOOD overall game, people WILL pay..It's as simple as that..
What you are paying for is constant small content adds and bug fixes, cheat fixes etc. Sub based MMORPGs has far more active development than one time boxed purchases of that time.
However F2P is very different, but some people just dont get it. F2P games are fundamentally designed in a way to make you pay a little bit here and a little bit there. For a P2P you pay a fixed amount of money for a fixed content where as in F2P the game is designed for you to keep paying and the more you pay the more powerful/more aestethic pleasing your character becomes as well a whole bunch of so called convenience items such as insta travel, insta rez etc.
P2P makes you pay for a game where as F2P is designed, as a game, to make you pay. There is a subtle difference with profound consequences. One is a game, the other is a slot machine/cash cow.
Not me. F2P is designed to make *some* pay, and the whales to pay a lot.
As for me, so far they make me pay nothing.
The big difference, which you don't seem to get, is that p2p makes everyone pay, and F2P only makes some pay.
Yeah you are right....But is it right ? if you want entertainment, the ones that actually DO pay should pay for YOUR entertainment , I know that you do not care aslong as YOU can play a game for free, but I do care, because it makes the games curently produced only half the games they should be.
I like to explore worlds, and if i get distracted by a small pay for this or that every time i try to do something in a game the illusion will suffer greatly, not only will the illusion of a world fall, the game in itself will be less of a game since it has to be designed in a very special way to "sell" .
It will be cheap games, created with a super mainstream formulas, as fast as possible..You can go ahead and enjoy those games, I'd say no thanks ..I'd rather pay and pay monthly for my entertaiment, a fully payd experience with everything included .
I hope that we have to pay for each life we use as a character; I would really like to see a move back to the arcade era. I really liked the fact that when I died playing Pac Man I had to pay more money to keep playing the game.
I think that the MMO market is moving in the right direction. Game companies should offer the gameplay for free and allow the user to purchase things like allowing their character to have running animations and animations for when a character jumps: purely cosmetic things.
I really enjoy free to play games, and I enjoy them because said games allow me to play it my way. Free to play games do not force me to pay for cosmetic things that I find useless like spell effects or textures. Instead, I can get the important stuff for FREE (how awesome is that)!
Anyways, I am really looking forward to EQ: Next because I believe that it will everything that I am looking for in a game. I have always wanted to play an eight foot tall Ogre character with charmingly good looks that could sneak up on people and assassinate them, and no game has allowed me to do something like this before. I believe that EQ: Next will be the next WoW killer.
Pay to have a running animation? So if you don't buy the animation your character moves like they do in South Park? Smed also said he will charging for Ogres by the foot so your eight foot tall one might be pretty pricey
Ah, yes, but these things are all cosmetic! Do you not see the beauty of the choice that we now have!
I wouldn't waste a single minute playing a game that charged me for running animations.. Nickel and diming sucks in MMOs and your ideas are the worste that I've seen. I hope you are just trolling.
I think that you are missing out on how awesome this is though. Running animations are not fundamental to gameplay; they are purely cosmetic. I can not tell you how many times I have purchased a game for 60$ and the running animations were just terrible, yet I still had to pay for them even though I did not want them.
By allowing users to play the GAME for free and putting all of the COSMETIC stuff into microtransaction form it allows the players to PLAY IT THEIR WAY. There are so many useless things that game companies have MADE players pay for even though the player may not want that particular thing. Who is to say that every player wants to pay for running animations or textures or shaders?
Free to play is one of the best things to happen to the game industry in a very long time.
Hmm..Running animations ...Let me tell you something ..Running animations SHOULD BE PART OF THE GAME, they could be good or bad but they should be PART OF THE GAME, unless there is no running in the game. Paying for extra bagspace or such things i can understand but paying for "nice running animations" ??? Running animations is NOT some "COSMETIC stuff"..
Don't really know if you are trying your best to "troll" in this thread but this has got to be the most stupid argument I have ever seen in terms of a F2P discussion. It shows how bad it really is to sell half a game as microtransactions ...
If you really want to play a game , you will pay for it ...sure there will ALWAYS be parts in that game that doesn't suit your particular preferences or needs, me for example , I don't care for all the achivement hysteria that is present in every single game, yet they are there because alot of folks do them obviously.
IMO if I play a game ...I would like to experience the whole gameworld without odd restrictions, i would just Close and uninstall a game that told me to visit the store once i pressed the shift key, certain activities in a game I do not do, but i'm still thinking they are good since they are PART OF THE COMPLETE PACKAGE.
FTP games are a plague that infects this gaming era with bad ideas like this...A free to play game can't be produced with the same amount of funding as a AAA title does , because of that the game and gameplay suffer and will only be a Shell of a game, an idea or a beta test if you will, and it will continue to be that game until it get's enough sales in their shop to make small improvements. But until that happens ...well then half of it's population will be gone to some other shitty FTP title.
If you have a GOOD overall game, people WILL pay..It's as simple as that..
omg, you people are way too easy.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The gaming industry and gamers in general have settled on those games being MMOs. *shrug* You are welcome to make up your own definition. Your definition will be ignored everywhere but this one place on the internet, where 200 to 300 people post every day, but you're welcome to do it.
Again, the industry in general isn't obsessed with MMORPGs being anything in particular. That really is just us and the small handful of websites focused on MMORPGs. Everyone else cares about video games, not MMORPGs in particular.
Pretty much this.
I said this many times. Diablo 3 is close enough to MMOs for me. Sure you can split hair and define it not as a MMO, but the small group co-op content is no different to me than 5-man dungeon, and even 10/25 man raid (25 is not that massive), and the only difference is that the lobby is not a city.
why would i care about the differences when I pretty much play MMOs like D3?
What you are paying for is constant small content adds and bug fixes, cheat fixes etc. Sub based MMORPGs has far more active development than one time boxed purchases of that time.
However F2P is very different, but some people just dont get it. F2P games are fundamentally designed in a way to make you pay a little bit here and a little bit there. For a P2P you pay a fixed amount of money for a fixed content where as in F2P the game is designed for you to keep paying and the more you pay the more powerful/more aestethic pleasing your character becomes as well a whole bunch of so called convenience items such as insta travel, insta rez etc.
P2P makes you pay for a game where as F2P is designed, as a game, to make you pay. There is a subtle difference with profound consequences. One is a game, the other is a slot machine/cash cow.
Not me. F2P is designed to make *some* pay, and the whales to pay a lot.
As for me, so far they make me pay nothing.
The big difference, which you don't seem to get, is that p2p makes everyone pay, and F2P only makes some pay.
Yeah you are right....But is it right ? if you want entertainment, the ones that actually DO pay should pay for YOUR entertainment , I know that you do not care aslong as YOU can play a game for free, but I do care, because it makes the games curently produced only half the games they should be.
I like to explore worlds, and if i get distracted by a small pay for this or that every time i try to do something in a game the illusion will suffer greatly, not only will the illusion of a world fall, the game in itself will be less of a game since it has to be designed in a very special way to "sell" .
It will be cheap games, created with a super mainstream formulas, as fast as possible..You can go ahead and enjoy those games, I'd say no thanks ..I'd rather pay and pay monthly for my entertaiment, a fully payd experience with everything included .
You are right .. "I don't care as long as i can play a game for free".
I won't play monthly fee for any MMOs in the future since I can find the same amount (or even more) fun in F2P games.
Everything included? I can't even finish the free content ... i don't need everything included. One game has limited content. A thousand has more free content than i have time for.
Comments
I try and avoid single game guilds now because of this same reason. I've been a member of an online community since 2005 and even though I change games or stop playing a game that some friends still want to keep playing we're always part of the same community and still run into each other in games all the time. This community appoints a guild leader for each new game and they go about setting up a guild for everyone. So really you're never looking for a new guild you just join the communities guild in that game.
They're also always just a room or two away on the voice server ( we have a 500 person server that all games/guilds use ) so they're never really just gone like what so often happens in games.
I know there are lots of communities like this now and it's becoming more and more popular for people who want to stay connected and be part of the social aspects of guilds to join this way instead of each new game being a new begining.
Its really the only legitimate thing imo where a revenue model can affect community. I think all the other stuff people throw out like monetary commitments or age or vanity items instead of crafting (me) affect different aspects of the game or are just coming out sideways from some other frustration.
Rift caved real quick for me as well. I still don't quite understand what happened. Its like everyone in my guild just burned out simultaneously a few months after storm legion.
I understood what you meant I just quoted it all to keep it relevant to what we were talking about, it is kind of off topic
Mega guilds sure have some down sides...like it's hard to get away from people you don't like when they're part of the same community and show up game after game :P
I mostly stay in mine because of the reasons I listed. Meeting up with old friends and it's an easy way to stay in touch with people you do like playing with. Joining a guild in a new game and knowing 80% of the people in it already is the most appealing thing they offer to me.
The hoops you have to jump though like you mention are for sure some of the negatives.
Clearly neither of us are alone.
But don't you think that the now quite dominant f2p model is evidence that not many players are willing to pay a premium to have stable games?
Turnover definitely comes into play, which explains the number of about 40% spending on F2P games as a whole, but ~10% in each game spending at any given time in a particular game. The churn is probably higher than sub games for a variety of reasons but i don't know if it's that much higher. High churn would mean A LOT more people are spending in F2P games than previously thought.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Agreed. On top of that I think as much as we all say we like change, we are much more comfortable and secure with what we know. The place you don't want to stand out from the crowd is being more expensive. If a dev/pub actually created a super excellent game (you know the dream game thingy) but charged $25 a month for it I think it would be as well received as we would like to think. Not because it might not be worth it, but because differentiating amongst other businesses by asking for more money will be a focus point.
Yeah. I think all this stuff will normalize sooner than later. Right now, its all new territory. SO many platforms, so many ways to pay. Nothing is standardized. You see all kinds of extremes being abused at the same time as something really worth the price being ignored. Im thinking of the bang for your buck for Rift right now as one example. And another is the triple dip Funcom did when they launched TSW. Day one DLC tactics by EA and the like. GW2 providing regular and frequent content updates on a box price with a small footprint cash shop.
Its just all over the place right now. To make predictions about almost anything is premature haha. Makes for interesting discussions though.
My post is so short and still you didn't manage to finish it. I mentioned another option to pay for free game, which, I think, totally suits your situation. You work as reference loser. No offense, I played f2p too and was in same role. Whales can feel good by comparing themselves with us. Its ok for you, since you play MMO as single player game, but not ok for me, since I play in community and for challenge and being constantly handicapped isn't fun. Plus all these reminders - you can buy this, you can buy that - ruin my immersion.
It seems, on your crusade vs imaginary haters you don't bother to notice that your definitions don't work outside of your head. Players don't need to buy superior cash-only weapon to pwn noobs, they just need to buy normal superior weapon right now. With short lifecycle of current MMO and trend to ignore balance, you can change rules every 2 months, making another piece of equipment best of the best. Ppl who grind for it will get it right before next nerf, while ppl, who buy current easymode toy on day 1, will have advantage 90% of all time. Count in other things, which can be bought and we get a whale with year worth of cool items, which he got in a 5 mins. It's done very well and subtle in Planetside2, much worse - in asian grinders.
I don't say its absolute no-no, its a fair business model. Only thing I say, thats there is no free part in F2P, everybody pays, even narui, even if he doesn't notice.
Everything else you "get" about my "hatred" is in your imagination. Advice to you as a fellow poster - run reality check on yourself more often, or else you wont be able to discern "something remotely based in reality" being too deep in your dreamy war vs infidels.
It comes from desire to find hate and show off by fighting it with a "voice of reason"Lol. Such fake numbers. Well.. as long as they count MOBAs to MMOs everything sounds fine. I really would be interested in the real F2P MMO numbers, and even more interesting would be the real F2P Western MMO numbers. Because there is no superior doing western F2P MMO.. the best may be some of the 101 games, or LoTRO or SWtoR or Planetside 2?
Maybe EQN may change that.. but we will see. F2P is a extremely good payment model for multiplayer only games, like MOBAs or Multiplayer only FPS games(TF2, Battlefield Heroes), but it don't do that well for MMOs in the west. Nevertheless some mixed payment models will be the future, if you like it or not does not matter.
On the other side what MMO after WoW did incredible well? GW2 may be one exception, but beside of that almost every game have dissapointed in some way or the other.. hopefully that trend will change sometimes soon, and a worthy MMO will appear and get the success it deserves. WoW is declining and that trend will not stop either.. we need a new king, or better a handful of well doing MMOs around.. diversity would be the best for everyone.. i really don't want to see another decade focusing on just one MMO model.
Totally ok for me. But here is one more point ..
there is a lot of complaints about how easy MMOs are ... so some handicapped is not a bad thing at all. I never buy any p2w items, or power up items, and i never have a problem in pve f2p games.
So those items are not only unnecessarily, but probably will make the game LESS fun.
Once I managed to translate this, it actually gave me a good laugh.
MOBAs are MMOs. They aren't MMORPGs.
**
The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Yeh .. that is pretty standard now. Multiple industry analytics sites include MOBAs in MMOs.
Then shouldn't you include games like call of duty as well or any multiplayer game online? What is the threshold of a MMO now? Or should we just call them MO's
I wouldn't mind since CoD is more massive than a 5-man dungeon.
However, it is just convenient conventional usage. It is not logical. People don't agree with the logic anyway. Just look at it as an arbitrary collection of online games.
They handicap ppl in comparison to other players. Its a bad thing for those who interacts with other community not only in chat.
Including MOBAs in MMO is just current fad among ignorant journalists, same as calling every online service e-cloud. No need to follow them for those who dont get money from it, like this site.
Ok.. 5vs5 is nowadays Massive Multiplayer? With that said... every other Multiplayer game is then a MMO, too. Why not throw in Starcraft into the equation.
MOBAs are MMOs. They aren't MMORPGs. ** The industry in general isn't obsessed with the smallest part of the MMO market. That's just us.
Ok.. 5vs5 is nowadays Massive Multiplayer? With that said... every other Multiplayer game is then a MMO, too. Why not throw in Starcraft into the equation.
The gaming industry and gamers in general have settled on those games being MMOs. *shrug* You are welcome to make up your own definition. Your definition will be ignored everywhere but this one place on the internet, where 200 to 300 people post every day, but you're welcome to do it.
Again, the industry in general isn't obsessed with MMORPGs being anything in particular. That really is just us and the small handful of websites focused on MMORPGs. Everyone else cares about video games, not MMORPGs in particular.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Hmm..Running animations ...Let me tell you something ..Running animations SHOULD BE PART OF THE GAME, they could be good or bad but they should be PART OF THE GAME, unless there is no running in the game. Paying for extra bagspace or such things i can understand but paying for "nice running animations" ??? Running animations is NOT some "COSMETIC stuff"..
Don't really know if you are trying your best to "troll" in this thread but this has got to be the most stupid argument I have ever seen in terms of a F2P discussion. It shows how bad it really is to sell half a game as microtransactions ...
If you really want to play a game , you will pay for it ...sure there will ALWAYS be parts in that game that doesn't suit your particular preferences or needs, me for example , I don't care for all the achivement hysteria that is present in every single game, yet they are there because alot of folks do them obviously.
IMO if I play a game ...I would like to experience the whole gameworld without odd restrictions, i would just Close and uninstall a game that told me to visit the store once i pressed the shift key, certain activities in a game I do not do, but i'm still thinking they are good since they are PART OF THE COMPLETE PACKAGE.
FTP games are a plague that infects this gaming era with bad ideas like this...A free to play game can't be produced with the same amount of funding as a AAA title does , because of that the game and gameplay suffer and will only be a Shell of a game, an idea or a beta test if you will, and it will continue to be that game until it get's enough sales in their shop to make small improvements. But until that happens ...well then half of it's population will be gone to some other shitty FTP title.
If you have a GOOD overall game, people WILL pay..It's as simple as that..
Yeah you are right....But is it right ? if you want entertainment, the ones that actually DO pay should pay for YOUR entertainment , I know that you do not care aslong as YOU can play a game for free, but I do care, because it makes the games curently produced only half the games they should be.
I like to explore worlds, and if i get distracted by a small pay for this or that every time i try to do something in a game the illusion will suffer greatly, not only will the illusion of a world fall, the game in itself will be less of a game since it has to be designed in a very special way to "sell" .
It will be cheap games, created with a super mainstream formulas, as fast as possible..You can go ahead and enjoy those games, I'd say no thanks ..I'd rather pay and pay monthly for my entertaiment, a fully payd experience with everything included .
omg, you people are way too easy.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Pretty much this.
I said this many times. Diablo 3 is close enough to MMOs for me. Sure you can split hair and define it not as a MMO, but the small group co-op content is no different to me than 5-man dungeon, and even 10/25 man raid (25 is not that massive), and the only difference is that the lobby is not a city.
why would i care about the differences when I pretty much play MMOs like D3?
You are right .. "I don't care as long as i can play a game for free".
I won't play monthly fee for any MMOs in the future since I can find the same amount (or even more) fun in F2P games.
Everything included? I can't even finish the free content ... i don't need everything included. One game has limited content. A thousand has more free content than i have time for.