Why does everyone assume that the model for this game is box sale + subscription fee? I assume it will be box sale +subscription + already planned cash shop conversion in 12 months after they've milked subs for all they're worth. In other words, the SWTOR model. Due to the NDA I cannot say whether or not ESO falls into this category or why, but suffice it to say there are aspects of this game that strike me as being "problems in search of a cash-shop solution" and leave it at that.
Why should an honest player favour a F2P model who is seriously interested to stick with a game for longer and is actually looking for quality ?
If you're that into the game why stop at $15 a month? Cough up some of that 'honesty and interest' in the cash shop...
One way or another were going to get a grand view of the difference in just a few more weeks.
I hope this is a success or the money behind the games will get just that much more skittish.
Why should I play something which is called a game but reminds rather on a "slot machine" ?
Iam not going to support this direction, I have seen enough F2P games to build a opinion about such a payment methode and how are games actually developed just around a cash shop.
You're the one that told F2P players to put their money where their mouth is and support the game.
All I did, was put the same point to you, and it seems you're not willing to go the extra mile to support the game.
It's that simple.
Seems like you dont have really an answer to my question.
Furthermore it is not only about supporting the game, it is about what TYPE of payment system.
For those concerned a cash shop is coming, get in now, play and leave when the cash shop gets to bad. Lotro was a fine game after the cash shop launched, within a year it became a P2W MMO.
So I will be taking part while the gaming ethos of TESO is solid, not corrupted by a cash shop. However as always wait for the first reviews.
As long as I have a job and earning dollars beyond my necessities, I could sub.
As long as the developer continuously supports the game by adding content, I could sub.
If it goes F2P, as long as it gives content, I could still play, and probably won't pay cash to their cash shop. I know the inevitability of where F2P games will be in the long run. Been there, done that.
SOLA - www.solaguild.com (christian guild. Being christian is not required for membership though)
The worst component of cash shops is something most often overlooked but is clearly P2W especially at a launch game is XP boosters...
If I play at the same intensity as my counterpart who is using XP pots they will be 50% higher (depending on the booster) than me and give them distinct advantages especially in PvP.
Even when you consider the fact that games boost players to a specific level for the sake of "fairness" (another bullshit mechanic) the other player will still have better developed skills and abilities based on the higher XP.
I for one am glad that there are serious AAA games being released with the Box/Sub model... It creates a level playing field and also eliminates many of the tourists. This also creates an obstacle for gold farmers and bots.
i sub to swtor and i receive no emails and dont have to pay a penny more than $15/month. most things in the cartel market can b purchased with in game credits, so u dont have to spend real money. there r a few that can only b purchased with cartel coins but nothing needed. anything and everything u want to add such as more bank slots, inventory slots or addons to ur ship like mailboxes or GTN kiosks can all b purchased with credits. once u r a subber u do not get bombarded with anything.
The people clamoring for F2P are a vocal minority. They have no interest in actually playing the game in a dedicated fashion, but hop from F2P game to F2P game, and are upset because this game looks good but they are unable to partake without actually paying for their time. They don't care that F2P games spend most of their development time post launch working on ways to further monetize the game with exclusive/premium outfits/races/adventures/whatever. They constantly think of ways to hinder or limit players in backpack space, weight limit, bank size, character slot count, appearance options, whatever. Even if it isn't pay to win, the game as a whole always suffers decreased quality when it becomes F2P. I'd rather pay a paltry $15 bucks a month, and eat one less fast food combo meal, for 100% of a game, than get 75% of a game for free and have to deal with all the other crap that comes with it (gold sellers, botters, shit-faced tween twirps, complete disregard for balance -- I'm looking at you ANet.)
The worst component of cash shops is something most often overlooked but is clearly P2W especially at a launch game is XP boosters...
If I play at the same intensity as my counterpart who is using XP pots they will be 50% higher (depending on the booster) than me and give them distinct advantages especially in PvP.
Even when you consider the fact that games boost players to a specific level for the sake of "fairness" (another bullshit mechanic) the other player will still have better developed skills and abilities based on the higher XP.
I for one am glad that there are serious AAA games being released with the Box/Sub model... It creates a level playing field and also eliminates many of the tourists. This also creates an obstacle for gold farmers and bots.
Another good point. People claim XP potions aren't pay to win, but they really are. They're a mechanical advantage, and generally developers of F2P games base their assumptions around people using these potions (when pacing the leveling curve,) and make the leveling steeper/more frustrating in an effort to get people to purchase these.
I too am glad that the subscription model is making a resurgence. Many developers seem to have realized how flawed the F2P model is, and while it provides a temporary surge in income that can often make a dying game profitable again, it is rarely a lasting solution. Also, it never works in an environment that is not purely PvE.
Luckily WildStar, Camelot Unchained, and ArcheAge are all sticking by the subscription model as well.
Originally posted by Spawnblade The people clamoring for F2P are a vocal minority. They have no interest in actually playing the game in a dedicated fashion, but hop from F2P game to F2P game, and are upset because this game looks good but they are unable to partake without actually paying for their time. They don't care that F2P games spend most of their development time post launch working on ways to further monetize the game with exclusive/premium outfits/races/adventures/whatever. They constantly think of ways to hinder or limit players in backpack space, weight limit, bank size, character slot count, appearance options, whatever. Even if it isn't pay to win, the game as a whole always suffers decreased quality when it becomes F2P. I'd rather pay a paltry $15 bucks a month, and eat one less fast food combo meal, for 100% of a game, than get 75% of a game for free and have to deal with all the other crap that comes with it (gold sellers, botters, shit-faced tween twirps, complete disregard for balance -- I'm looking at you ANet.)
Interested to see the statistics you pulled this information from, can you provide that to us please?
Originally posted by Spawnblade The people clamoring for F2P are a vocal minority. They have no interest in actually playing the game in a dedicated fashion, but hop from F2P game to F2P game, and are upset because this game looks good but they are unable to partake without actually paying for their time. They don't care that F2P games spend most of their development time post launch working on ways to further monetize the game with exclusive/premium outfits/races/adventures/whatever. They constantly think of ways to hinder or limit players in backpack space, weight limit, bank size, character slot count, appearance options, whatever. Even if it isn't pay to win, the game as a whole always suffers decreased quality when it becomes F2P. I'd rather pay a paltry $15 bucks a month, and eat one less fast food combo meal, for 100% of a game, than get 75% of a game for free and have to deal with all the other crap that comes with it (gold sellers, botters, shit-faced tween twirps, complete disregard for balance -- I'm looking at you ANet.)
Interested to see the statistics you pulled this information from, can you provide that to us please?
Go read the arguments made by the dev teams of the aforementioned upcoming subscription games. They took the time to write up statistics.
However I fully support their analyses with my own, firsthand experience with half a dozen F2P games, including TOR, Rift, GW2, Shin Megami Tensei, League of Legends, and Neverwinter. Every update GW2 adds more crap to their cash shop, yet they refuse to fix the inherent balance issues in their game. TOR went from being enjoyable, to being a cash grab. I owned the collectors edition for that game, and despite continuing to pay a subscription, I -still- don't have full access to everything I had before the game went F2P. In fact, when I stopped paying my subscription, I lost access to half my characters, if I take any gear off of them they can't wear it (because they're artifacts,) I can only queue for PvP a certain number of times per day, and I need to pay real money (or ridiculous auction prices) for bank space expansions. To top it off, they release new bundles weekly in the cash shop for stupid vanity outfits and mounts, completely neglecting the content additions promised with the original launch over a year ago. When the game was sub-based, there were actually regular balance patches/content updates. I could go into the other games, but they all suffer from the same focus on vanity items and providing reasons for people to use the cash shop. I mean, they have to, seeing as that's the money that will keep the game up and running.
Originally posted by Spawnblade The people clamoring for F2P are a vocal minority. They have no interest in actually playing the game in a dedicated fashion, but hop from F2P game to F2P game, and are upset because this game looks good but they are unable to partake without actually paying for their time. They don't care that F2P games spend most of their development time post launch working on ways to further monetize the game with exclusive/premium outfits/races/adventures/whatever. They constantly think of ways to hinder or limit players in backpack space, weight limit, bank size, character slot count, appearance options, whatever. Even if it isn't pay to win, the game as a whole always suffers decreased quality when it becomes F2P. I'd rather pay a paltry $15 bucks a month, and eat one less fast food combo meal, for 100% of a game, than get 75% of a game for free and have to deal with all the other crap that comes with it (gold sellers, botters, shit-faced tween twirps, complete disregard for balance -- I'm looking at you ANet.)
Interested to see the statistics you pulled this information from, can you provide that to us please?
There have been 6-7 polls on this site alone man, it usually ends up with 75% to 25% in favor of subs. These are the non-game specific polls. Also several polls externally (Eldersouls, Tamriel Foundry, blah blah blah) have pointed that the majority of people actually want a sub on this game.
It's looking at the market conditions and the metrics and understanding what current business model is the best for maximizing profits. At this point in time, it is the hybrid "Freemium" model. Ultimately, yes it's about selling items in a cash shop that have been proven to be popular purchases by gamers. Again, absolutely nothing wrong with that. That is how business works. Blizzard understands that as does Zenimax, hence why they have chosen to add cash shops to their games on top of the required subscription fee. Maximizing profits.
There really is no debate because, like Digital Distribution and DLC before it, the gaming industry has tapped into a profitable model based on the desires of the gaming community. There is only a debate because there still lies a segment of the gaming community that refuses to live in the 21st Century. Society has changed and thusly the industry has changed. We are here because, despite the initial outcry, more people had no problem buying $10 horse armor than did.
Like it or not, that's the way the world works. Life isn't fair for some people. No sense blaming a publisher, a developer, or a game for catering to what the majority of the gaming community wants. It's called good business. Those who do not like it either need to learn to live with it and adapt or ultimately find a new hobby to enjoy. I know I did with the two above mentioned changes to the industry, and am ultimately glad I did as I am enjoying more games than I ever have before. Next up is the "Games as a Service" concept. We'll have to wait to see how much traction this one gets. Perhaps, if this becomes normal and accepted, it could be the point where I find a new hobby (or go back to playing board games). Only time will tell.
Ultimately, gamers need to face the facts. The gaming industry is Big Business. Even the indie scene, for all the innocent youth and high moral ideals just boils down to trying to make money with games. The gaming industry is still relatively young - only about 30-odd years old at this point, so it still has a lot to learn from industries that have been around for much longer - like the retail industry. Thus far, it has shown signs of growing and maturing, and thusly, the even younger MMO genre has as well.
The Age of the Catasser is over. The Era of the Poopsocker has ended. The days of the PKer are past. This is the 21st Century of gaming and the 21st Century of the MMO genre. There will always be a place for the niche - Eve bears that out. We have been witness to a paradigm shift in the business model of the MMO. Those that refuse to accept the change will be left behind to find a new hobby to enjoy. Those that embrace it will help the genre grow and mature further. The Subscription based model is not going away completely. Also with that, people either don't know, or conveniently forget that the Free to Play model has been around just as long (if not longer) than the sub-based model. There are games that launched F2P in the late 90's that are still going strong today.
It is only because of the efforts of companies like Sony, Blizzard, and Origin Systems that the gaming community became convinced that you needed a subscription in order to produce an enjoyable MMO. That has never been the case, and we are now seeing the majority of the gaming community realizing that fact. Credit has to go to ArenaNet with the original Guild Wars for bucking the trend, and opening the eyes of gamers to the thriving Free to Play market. As a community, we are still not there yet - as evidenced by opinions and threads similar to this across all gaming outlets, but as I said, the industry is maturing and we are learning along with it. The hybrid Freemium model is the future of the genre. It offers the best of both worlds when done correctly. Sure, there will be mis-steps along the way, but that is all part of the learning process. Again, gamers have a choice. Either embrace the maturity and the future of the industry and help it grow in the correct direction or allow it to pass them by, continue living in the past, and ultimately go the way of the Dodo.
@spawnblade - you do realize that WoW (a subscription game) has all of those "F2P detriments" that you listed, right (gold farmers, botters, immature players, etc.? You also know that each and every one of them is also found in all other MMOs, whether sub, hybrid, or F2P, right?
Originally posted by Spawnblade The people clamoring for F2P are a vocal minority. They have no interest in actually playing the game in a dedicated fashion, but hop from F2P game to F2P game, and are upset because this game looks good but they are unable to partake without actually paying for their time. They don't care that F2P games spend most of their development time post launch working on ways to further monetize the game with exclusive/premium outfits/races/adventures/whatever. They constantly think of ways to hinder or limit players in backpack space, weight limit, bank size, character slot count, appearance options, whatever. Even if it isn't pay to win, the game as a whole always suffers decreased quality when it becomes F2P. I'd rather pay a paltry $15 bucks a month, and eat one less fast food combo meal, for 100% of a game, than get 75% of a game for free and have to deal with all the other crap that comes with it (gold sellers, botters, shit-faced tween twirps, complete disregard for balance -- I'm looking at you ANet.)
Interested to see the statistics you pulled this information from, can you provide that to us please?
There have been 6-7 polls on this site alone man, it usually ends up with 75% to 25% in favor of subs. These are the non-game specific polls. Also several polls externally (Eldersouls, Tamriel Foundry, blah blah blah) have pointed that the majority of people actually want a sub on this game.
You mean all the places where butthurt P2P fans go to vent that their money can no longer insulate them like it used to? Please come back when you have 6-7 studies in multiple gaming markets done by non-biased individuals on a large sample group.
Originally posted by Jyiiga I for one, would much rather pay 15 dollars a month for even an average game than have an item shop built around the very core of the game.
Comments
Why does everyone assume that the model for this game is box sale + subscription fee? I assume it will be box sale +subscription + already planned cash shop conversion in 12 months after they've milked subs for all they're worth. In other words, the SWTOR model. Due to the NDA I cannot say whether or not ESO falls into this category or why, but suffice it to say there are aspects of this game that strike me as being "problems in search of a cash-shop solution" and leave it at that.
Seems like you dont have really an answer to my question.
Furthermore it is not only about supporting the game, it is about what TYPE of payment system.
For those concerned a cash shop is coming, get in now, play and leave when the cash shop gets to bad. Lotro was a fine game after the cash shop launched, within a year it became a P2W MMO.
So I will be taking part while the gaming ethos of TESO is solid, not corrupted by a cash shop. However as always wait for the first reviews.
As long as I have a job and earning dollars beyond my necessities, I could sub.
As long as the developer continuously supports the game by adding content, I could sub.
If it goes F2P, as long as it gives content, I could still play, and probably won't pay cash to their cash shop. I know the inevitability of where F2P games will be in the long run. Been there, done that.
SOLA - www.solaguild.com
(christian guild. Being christian is not required for membership though)
The worst component of cash shops is something most often overlooked but is clearly P2W especially at a launch game is XP boosters...
If I play at the same intensity as my counterpart who is using XP pots they will be 50% higher (depending on the booster) than me and give them distinct advantages especially in PvP.
Even when you consider the fact that games boost players to a specific level for the sake of "fairness" (another bullshit mechanic) the other player will still have better developed skills and abilities based on the higher XP.
I for one am glad that there are serious AAA games being released with the Box/Sub model... It creates a level playing field and also eliminates many of the tourists. This also creates an obstacle for gold farmers and bots.
What are your other Hobbies?
Gaming is Dirt Cheap compared to this...
i sub to swtor and i receive no emails and dont have to pay a penny more than $15/month. most things in the cartel market can b purchased with in game credits, so u dont have to spend real money. there r a few that can only b purchased with cartel coins but nothing needed. anything and everything u want to add such as more bank slots, inventory slots or addons to ur ship like mailboxes or GTN kiosks can all b purchased with credits. once u r a subber u do not get bombarded with anything.
^^^i love u man^^^
Another good point. People claim XP potions aren't pay to win, but they really are. They're a mechanical advantage, and generally developers of F2P games base their assumptions around people using these potions (when pacing the leveling curve,) and make the leveling steeper/more frustrating in an effort to get people to purchase these.
I too am glad that the subscription model is making a resurgence. Many developers seem to have realized how flawed the F2P model is, and while it provides a temporary surge in income that can often make a dying game profitable again, it is rarely a lasting solution. Also, it never works in an environment that is not purely PvE.
Luckily WildStar, Camelot Unchained, and ArcheAge are all sticking by the subscription model as well.
why dont' you just sub to those "so called F2P games".
I really just treat those F2P games as extended trial.
I just want to try the game first before I decided to put money into it.
Interested to see the statistics you pulled this information from, can you provide that to us please?
Go read the arguments made by the dev teams of the aforementioned upcoming subscription games. They took the time to write up statistics.
However I fully support their analyses with my own, firsthand experience with half a dozen F2P games, including TOR, Rift, GW2, Shin Megami Tensei, League of Legends, and Neverwinter. Every update GW2 adds more crap to their cash shop, yet they refuse to fix the inherent balance issues in their game. TOR went from being enjoyable, to being a cash grab. I owned the collectors edition for that game, and despite continuing to pay a subscription, I -still- don't have full access to everything I had before the game went F2P. In fact, when I stopped paying my subscription, I lost access to half my characters, if I take any gear off of them they can't wear it (because they're artifacts,) I can only queue for PvP a certain number of times per day, and I need to pay real money (or ridiculous auction prices) for bank space expansions. To top it off, they release new bundles weekly in the cash shop for stupid vanity outfits and mounts, completely neglecting the content additions promised with the original launch over a year ago. When the game was sub-based, there were actually regular balance patches/content updates. I could go into the other games, but they all suffer from the same focus on vanity items and providing reasons for people to use the cash shop. I mean, they have to, seeing as that's the money that will keep the game up and running.
There have been 6-7 polls on this site alone man, it usually ends up with 75% to 25% in favor of subs. These are the non-game specific polls. Also several polls externally (Eldersouls, Tamriel Foundry, blah blah blah) have pointed that the majority of people actually want a sub on this game.
It's looking at the market conditions and the metrics and understanding what current business model is the best for maximizing profits. At this point in time, it is the hybrid "Freemium" model. Ultimately, yes it's about selling items in a cash shop that have been proven to be popular purchases by gamers. Again, absolutely nothing wrong with that. That is how business works. Blizzard understands that as does Zenimax, hence why they have chosen to add cash shops to their games on top of the required subscription fee. Maximizing profits.
There really is no debate because, like Digital Distribution and DLC before it, the gaming industry has tapped into a profitable model based on the desires of the gaming community. There is only a debate because there still lies a segment of the gaming community that refuses to live in the 21st Century. Society has changed and thusly the industry has changed. We are here because, despite the initial outcry, more people had no problem buying $10 horse armor than did.
Like it or not, that's the way the world works. Life isn't fair for some people. No sense blaming a publisher, a developer, or a game for catering to what the majority of the gaming community wants. It's called good business. Those who do not like it either need to learn to live with it and adapt or ultimately find a new hobby to enjoy. I know I did with the two above mentioned changes to the industry, and am ultimately glad I did as I am enjoying more games than I ever have before. Next up is the "Games as a Service" concept. We'll have to wait to see how much traction this one gets. Perhaps, if this becomes normal and accepted, it could be the point where I find a new hobby (or go back to playing board games). Only time will tell.
Ultimately, gamers need to face the facts. The gaming industry is Big Business. Even the indie scene, for all the innocent youth and high moral ideals just boils down to trying to make money with games. The gaming industry is still relatively young - only about 30-odd years old at this point, so it still has a lot to learn from industries that have been around for much longer - like the retail industry. Thus far, it has shown signs of growing and maturing, and thusly, the even younger MMO genre has as well.
The Age of the Catasser is over. The Era of the Poopsocker has ended. The days of the PKer are past. This is the 21st Century of gaming and the 21st Century of the MMO genre. There will always be a place for the niche - Eve bears that out. We have been witness to a paradigm shift in the business model of the MMO. Those that refuse to accept the change will be left behind to find a new hobby to enjoy. Those that embrace it will help the genre grow and mature further. The Subscription based model is not going away completely. Also with that, people either don't know, or conveniently forget that the Free to Play model has been around just as long (if not longer) than the sub-based model. There are games that launched F2P in the late 90's that are still going strong today.
It is only because of the efforts of companies like Sony, Blizzard, and Origin Systems that the gaming community became convinced that you needed a subscription in order to produce an enjoyable MMO. That has never been the case, and we are now seeing the majority of the gaming community realizing that fact. Credit has to go to ArenaNet with the original Guild Wars for bucking the trend, and opening the eyes of gamers to the thriving Free to Play market. As a community, we are still not there yet - as evidenced by opinions and threads similar to this across all gaming outlets, but as I said, the industry is maturing and we are learning along with it. The hybrid Freemium model is the future of the genre. It offers the best of both worlds when done correctly. Sure, there will be mis-steps along the way, but that is all part of the learning process. Again, gamers have a choice. Either embrace the maturity and the future of the industry and help it grow in the correct direction or allow it to pass them by, continue living in the past, and ultimately go the way of the Dodo.
@spawnblade - you do realize that WoW (a subscription game) has all of those "F2P detriments" that you listed, right (gold farmers, botters, immature players, etc.? You also know that each and every one of them is also found in all other MMOs, whether sub, hybrid, or F2P, right?
You mean all the places where butthurt P2P fans go to vent that their money can no longer insulate them like it used to? Please come back when you have 6-7 studies in multiple gaming markets done by non-biased individuals on a large sample group.
But you'll get both.