Ask Zenimax how much it cost to make ESO and you'll have your answer. I would argue it's those that expect a game costing tens of millions to create to be free up front that fits the derogatory nature of the OP title.
I grew up in a time where I did have to buy my games from brick and mortars... as a matter of fact I had to ride my friggin bicycle to the Electronics Boutique on Main Street Flushing from my parents house in College Point as a kid to spend upwards of $60 on a game like Ultima 4 with money I collected from mowing lawns or shoveling snow or other odd kid type jobs and always managed to support my hobby... Free was not even an option...
Heh...funny thing is I remember spending $60 on Ultima 4 in 1988 or so and $60 as a teenager and back then that seemed like a ton of money but I always thought that game and games like it were worth the money because they gave me months of entertainment. They included things they didn't need to like cloth maps and really cool manuals just to make the game feel more alive. Now-a- days that would be "DLC!" or "$30 extra for the collector's edition!" Compare it to Garriott's new game where you can buy land in the game for like $1000 real money on top of having to buy the actual game.
I don't mind paying once for a game or subbing to an online game but I really feel like games companies are much more about the greed than they used to be. It's not just "Buy our game!" now (perfectly reasonable) but "buy our game and buy the collector's edition and the 20 pieces of DLC that we'll come out with and if it's an MMO we'll charge you a sub on top of our high box price until we figure it's more profitable to nickle and dime you through cash shop!" (and then our loyalest fans who paid our sub our kind of screwed by sudden F2P but who cares about them? LOL)
I think a lot of gamers aren't so much entitled as just want one simple price to pay without being gouged everywhere they turn by games.
I think the argument that you've given here defines more of what's wrong with f2p than p2p.
Originally posted by Soki123 MMO players are getting whinier, and whinier every year. It s been like this for years, so what, no one complained for years, now all the self entitled generation, is hitting the MMO scene I guess.
Heh...There's a good chance that I'm older than you. People are just sick of paying tons of money up front on bad games and there's more competition which means people are less willing to accept things that rip them off just because "it's always been that way". I don't mind paying for a good game. I wouldn't even be talking about sub games if I did but I don't like being taken advantage of and wasting money.
Expensive boxes for MMOs never made much sense and much less so now when 99% of people buy them online. When you sub to a magazine does the magazine publisher send you a big box you have to pay a lot for before you can start getting your magazine? The whole idea is silly.
So don't buy BAD games. There's nothing wrong with a subscription in principle, and before WoW it was incredibly successful. The failure we've seen of those recent subscription games has been because of design or business decisions. Even the much despised SWTOR sold a good number of boxes. It however was rushed by the publisher and they felt that raids weren't important.
Would rather have a game be free to play but then subject yourself to constant advertisement or content gating? Would you rather have people who can expedite their ascent to max level with money? Would you rather the game spend money on developing gimmicky cash shop content or have their focus be on actual gameplay content?
I for one want a gated community. I want a community where we're all paying the subscription, we're all on equal footing with opportunities. You tout the idea that the f2p model is better, and with its advances, have we actually seen games gotten better? Have we actually gotten more content in games? No. We haven't. And if you've been playing this genre long enough you'd see what the "old timers" are talking about. Sure, f2p is more profitable but that's because you as the consumer are paying more and are likely getting coerced or convinced into doing so.
I grew up in a time where I did have to buy my games from brick and mortars... as a matter of fact I had to ride my friggin bicycle to the Electronics Boutique on Main Street Flushing from my parents house in College Point as a kid to spend upwards of $60 on a game like Ultima 4 with money I collected from mowing lawns or shoveling snow or other odd kid type jobs and always managed to support my hobby... Free was not even an option...
Heh...funny thing is I remember spending $60 on Ultima 4 in 1988 or so and $60 as a teenager and back then that seemed like a ton of money but I always thought that game and games like it were worth the money because they gave me months of entertainment. They included things they didn't need to like cloth maps and really cool manuals just to make the game feel more alive. Now-a- days that would be "DLC!" or "$30 extra for the collector's edition!" Compare it to Garriott's new game where you can buy land in the game for like $1000 real money on top of having to buy the actual game.
I don't mind paying once for a game or subbing to an online game but I really feel like games companies are much more about the greed than they used to be. It's not just "Buy our game!" now (perfectly reasonable) but "buy our game and buy the collector's edition and the 20 pieces of DLC that we'll come out with and if it's an MMO we'll charge you a sub on top of our high box price until we figure it's more profitable to nickle and dime you through cash shop!" (and then our loyalest fans who paid our sub our kind of screwed by sudden F2P but who cares about them? LOL)
I think a lot of gamers aren't so much entitled as just want one simple price to pay without being gouged everywhere they turn by games.
The budgets today far exceed that of the days of the Ultima days... I saw an interview from one of the former SSI guys where they had to put a game together in a matter of weeks not years, and they produced great quality at that time...
Today because of this F2P nonsense and this entitled gamer mentality as I previously stated these gaming companies (which are no longer mom and pop operations like in the days of Ultima 4) are these huge corps that have shareholders or belong to some major conglomerate and the bottom line IS the bottom line... They need to now create these shady and quite frankly shitty ways to gouge gamers... and I am not talking about box price... I gladly pay that because I grew up doing so and accept that... I am talking about the game day DLC, the bag space, all the barriers that are put up forcing the NEED for the so called convenience items in cash shops.
It's this need to be free... This is why many games just crash and burn... Gamers have learned to adapt to this and just consume and leave behind... I mean can you blame SWTOR for charging for hot bars? Gamers get pissed because now they can only consume to a point... then they are stuck! HOW DARE I NEED TO SPEND MONEY?!!!! But this just goes to show you the shitty things companies need to do in order to turn a dime...
So TESO, Wildstar, DFUW, whatever else, I gladly support buying the box, then gladly pay my monthly sub and I feel rewarded and honored to do so.
Heh...funny thing is I remember spending $60 on Ultima 4 in 1988 or so and $60 as a teenager and back then that seemed like a ton of money but I always thought that game and games like it were worth the money because they gave me months of entertainment. They included things they didn't need to like cloth maps and really cool manuals just to make the game feel more alive. Now-a- days that would be "DLC!" or "$30 extra for the collector's edition!" Compare it to Garriott's new game where you can buy land in the game for like $1000 real money on top of having to buy the actual game.
I don't mind paying once for a game or subbing to an online game but I really feel like games companies are much more about the greed than they used to be. It's not just "Buy our game!" now (perfectly reasonable) but "buy our game and buy the collector's edition and the 20 pieces of DLC that we'll come out with and if it's an MMO we'll charge you a sub on top of our high box price until we figure it's more profitable to nickle and dime you through cash shop!" (and then our loyalest fans who paid our sub our kind of screwed by sudden F2P but who cares about them? LOL)
I think a lot of gamers aren't so much entitled as just want one simple price to pay without being gouged everywhere they turn by games.
I think the argument that you've given here defines more of what's wrong with f2p than p2p.
I agree in that I also dislike F2P. My argument is not against subs but against sub games with high box prices and, to be honest, if these were all really high quality games with tons of content updates and no cash shops for years after launch, I may even be willing to pay the 60+15 repeating dollars but games like SWTOR which launch not ready for prime time and then go F2P within months give you the worst of both worlds and really feel like pure cash grabs. EVE and TSW do payment model right as far as I'm concerned. I also like LOTRO's lifetime subscription and don't regret getting that despite having some sizable issues with their current F2P model.
OP how is the developer supposed to recoup the millions spent on developemnt? Games like Skyrim charge that much right? That's because they need to make money back since they te in the hole. I agree with you on a principal basis but realistically it just doesn't work for blockbuster titles. The 60.00 isn't just for the cardboard box that is worth 2.00.
Heh...funny thing is I remember spending $60 on Ultima 4 in 1988 or so and $60 as a teenager and back then that seemed like a ton of money but I always thought that game and games like it were worth the money because they gave me months of entertainment. They included things they didn't need to like cloth maps and really cool manuals just to make the game feel more alive. Now-a- days that would be "DLC!" or "$30 extra for the collector's edition!" Compare it to Garriott's new game where you can buy land in the game for like $1000 real money on top of having to buy the actual game.
I don't mind paying once for a game or subbing to an online game but I really feel like games companies are much more about the greed than they used to be. It's not just "Buy our game!" now (perfectly reasonable) but "buy our game and buy the collector's edition and the 20 pieces of DLC that we'll come out with and if it's an MMO we'll charge you a sub on top of our high box price until we figure it's more profitable to nickle and dime you through cash shop!" (and then our loyalest fans who paid our sub our kind of screwed by sudden F2P but who cares about them? LOL)
I think a lot of gamers aren't so much entitled as just want one simple price to pay without being gouged everywhere they turn by games.
I think the argument that you've given here defines more of what's wrong with f2p than p2p.
I agree in that I also dislike F2P. My argument is not against subs but against sub games with high box prices and, to be honest, if these were all really high quality games with tons of content updates and no cash shops for years after launch, I may even be willing to pay the 60+15 repeating dollars but games like SWTOR which launch not ready for prime time and then go F2P within months give you the worst of both worlds and really feel like pure cash grabs. EVE and TSW do payment model right as far as I'm concerned. I also like LOTRO's lifetime subscription and don't regret getting that despite having some sizable issues with their current F2P model.
And that's certainly a fair position. Part of the problem with the current climate is the swaths of jaded gamers. Many of us don't want to spend the money, not for lack of money or refusal to pay, but because time and time again we're disappointed. I shook my head when ESO announced their payment model - it doesn't suit the game and it doesn't suit its legacy. But then again we're seeing the sort of hubris seen with SWTOR. I'd go so far to say that its worse, judging by the amount of volte-faces the company has done.
I think Wildstar is in a good spot to charge a fee and I'm happy to pay that. Everything I've seen in the game has been awesome and I want to support that. TSW, you bring up a good title there. I bought that one, happy to see a buy-to-play model. It's not the best MMO ever, but it's worth the box price.
Well obviously it's an artifact of when most people still bought games in physical stores which companies convieniently never got rid of out of greed but in this era when a lot of games require no upfront investment I think demanding a box price and a sub is shooting themselves in the foot and driving away a lot of potential customers.
Example I'm somewhat interested in playing ESO. If I just had to sub for a month and see if I liked it I wouldn't hesitate to do that but I probably will not be buying a $60 box on launch day just for a game which I will still have to keep paying for if I do like it. At least with Skyrim for example if I do plunk down the $60 on launch day and then am somewhat let down I can keep it on my hard drive and maybe it will grow on me.
There's no additional value in the box that justifies the additional price. It's only value is the "free" month sub code which could easily be sold in a much smaller package much cheaper if people don't want to buy online. Boxes are a total ripoff for the consumer and probably drive a lot of business away from these games.
I should ask why do non AAA games not charge a sub or box fee.
The answer is simple you get what you pay for. There is a reason there has only been one AAA MMO ever not to release with a box fee and sub fee. That was GW2 which arguably was not a MMO as it was targeted towards people that do not play games long term.
If you want a quality MMO with long term endgame content you have to pay for it. The Sub system is by far a better system than the piece meal money grab of F2P. Not to mention the community. rather than attracting a juvenile ADHD community of people with an average age in their 20's sub based games have an average age almost 10 years older. The simple thing is free games are for kids and sub based games for adults. Does that make one better than the other? No but there is a clear line in content and the maturity of the community,
The idea is that they continue to develop the game, whilst you continue to play. This is what we have seen in classic MMO games.
If you continue to enjoy the new content, then it works out well for all. If you don't like it you have to cancel and if you're not sure about it... that's probably where you'll lose out.
I still prefer it to the F2P model or full price buy with a cash shop, because they inevitably change the gameplay to push you into spending hard cash - repeatedly. Then it's difficult to get it out of your mind that someone has paid for an advantage. Getting a level playing field and a game focused on enjoyment is the way to go.
I think it should be cheaper if we Download the game instead of buying the actual box. isnt it cheaper for them to just set up the downloads and take our money?
Better quality games did charge for the box. But you got often a month free gaming time.
When I see a game is offered for free, Iam at once sceptical about the game quality and in most cases free "box games" or other type of "free" games dont offer high quality standards.
If a game is really good I dont see why a box price isnt worth it, high quality standards are needed to be successfull and people will pay it.
And when it comes to F2P games my opinion about them did change drastically in the last months, rather negative.
Such F2P games are not really PC games to me anymore they remind me more on a damn SLOT MACHINE.
If the game is good people will sub/vip. The industry has been taking advantage of the sheep in our community with digital box cost.. Spending millions on ads to hype reskinned, 1 month throwaways. While the shirts and ties say "who cares? We just got 4-6 months up front "
I'd like some hard facts on how much it takes to make a game and keep a staff of techs and investors in the green afterwards. You think they craft this stuff with magic?
Originally posted by Jemcrystal I'd like some hard facts on how much it takes to make a game and keep a staff of techs and investors in the green afterwards. You think they craft this stuff with magic?
If you have a good game with quality that will keep many people playing for many months or years I don't see why you can't make plenty of money with $30 or even $15 box + $15 sub. You'd get a bigger initial audience who would then stick around because of your compelling gameplay. If your game is designed for the "month and done" player, yeah, you need the higher box price. Guess which type of game I prefer and wish more companies would design?:)
It's all about fast profit vs. long term sustainable growth.
Comments
I think the argument that you've given here defines more of what's wrong with f2p than p2p.
Well said. I totally agree.
The budgets today far exceed that of the days of the Ultima days... I saw an interview from one of the former SSI guys where they had to put a game together in a matter of weeks not years, and they produced great quality at that time...
Today because of this F2P nonsense and this entitled gamer mentality as I previously stated these gaming companies (which are no longer mom and pop operations like in the days of Ultima 4) are these huge corps that have shareholders or belong to some major conglomerate and the bottom line IS the bottom line... They need to now create these shady and quite frankly shitty ways to gouge gamers... and I am not talking about box price... I gladly pay that because I grew up doing so and accept that... I am talking about the game day DLC, the bag space, all the barriers that are put up forcing the NEED for the so called convenience items in cash shops.
It's this need to be free... This is why many games just crash and burn... Gamers have learned to adapt to this and just consume and leave behind... I mean can you blame SWTOR for charging for hot bars? Gamers get pissed because now they can only consume to a point... then they are stuck! HOW DARE I NEED TO SPEND MONEY?!!!! But this just goes to show you the shitty things companies need to do in order to turn a dime...
So TESO, Wildstar, DFUW, whatever else, I gladly support buying the box, then gladly pay my monthly sub and I feel rewarded and honored to do so.
What are your other Hobbies?
Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...
I agree in that I also dislike F2P. My argument is not against subs but against sub games with high box prices and, to be honest, if these were all really high quality games with tons of content updates and no cash shops for years after launch, I may even be willing to pay the 60+15 repeating dollars but games like SWTOR which launch not ready for prime time and then go F2P within months give you the worst of both worlds and really feel like pure cash grabs. EVE and TSW do payment model right as far as I'm concerned. I also like LOTRO's lifetime subscription and don't regret getting that despite having some sizable issues with their current F2P model.
And that's certainly a fair position. Part of the problem with the current climate is the swaths of jaded gamers. Many of us don't want to spend the money, not for lack of money or refusal to pay, but because time and time again we're disappointed. I shook my head when ESO announced their payment model - it doesn't suit the game and it doesn't suit its legacy. But then again we're seeing the sort of hubris seen with SWTOR. I'd go so far to say that its worse, judging by the amount of volte-faces the company has done.
I think Wildstar is in a good spot to charge a fee and I'm happy to pay that. Everything I've seen in the game has been awesome and I want to support that. TSW, you bring up a good title there. I bought that one, happy to see a buy-to-play model. It's not the best MMO ever, but it's worth the box price.
I should ask why do non AAA games not charge a sub or box fee.
The answer is simple you get what you pay for. There is a reason there has only been one AAA MMO ever not to release with a box fee and sub fee. That was GW2 which arguably was not a MMO as it was targeted towards people that do not play games long term.
If you want a quality MMO with long term endgame content you have to pay for it. The Sub system is by far a better system than the piece meal money grab of F2P. Not to mention the community. rather than attracting a juvenile ADHD community of people with an average age in their 20's sub based games have an average age almost 10 years older. The simple thing is free games are for kids and sub based games for adults. Does that make one better than the other? No but there is a clear line in content and the maturity of the community,
box prices pays for development cost...
subs pay for servers, updates, CMs etc
sub fees do not = mature community of adults (see wow)
$60+$15 do not = lots of money (do some financial planning, most banks have free literature on how to save)
The idea is that they continue to develop the game, whilst you continue to play. This is what we have seen in classic MMO games.
If you continue to enjoy the new content, then it works out well for all. If you don't like it you have to cancel and if you're not sure about it... that's probably where you'll lose out.
I still prefer it to the F2P model or full price buy with a cash shop, because they inevitably change the gameplay to push you into spending hard cash - repeatedly. Then it's difficult to get it out of your mind that someone has paid for an advantage. Getting a level playing field and a game focused on enjoyment is the way to go.
Better quality games did charge for the box. But you got often a month free gaming time.
When I see a game is offered for free, Iam at once sceptical about the game quality and in most cases free "box games" or other type of "free" games dont offer high quality standards.
If a game is really good I dont see why a box price isnt worth it, high quality standards are needed to be successfull and people will pay it.
And when it comes to F2P games my opinion about them did change drastically in the last months, rather negative.
Such F2P games are not really PC games to me anymore they remind me more on a damn SLOT MACHINE.
If you have a good game with quality that will keep many people playing for many months or years I don't see why you can't make plenty of money with $30 or even $15 box + $15 sub. You'd get a bigger initial audience who would then stick around because of your compelling gameplay. If your game is designed for the "month and done" player, yeah, you need the higher box price. Guess which type of game I prefer and wish more companies would design?:)
It's all about fast profit vs. long term sustainable growth.