But you DID give the developer all of your money upfront when you bought the game. That covered it's development costs. Everything thereafter is gravy. How is spending $50 to play a game for 30 days promising you new content and spending $50 to play a game forever not promising you new content. You just ASSUME your subscription is being used to generate new content but the reality is, all that content was already in the pipes before you even bought the game.
I just don't fathom this mentality at all. All a subscription does is ALLOW you to continue playing a game that you already paid for. Whether there is or is not any updates to the game has zero to do with your subscription fee. If it did, they'd forego a box price entirely, allow you to download it for free and only let you play it while you have active time on your game card. But they don't do they?
Take the WoD expansion, that's a $50 fee that comes with 30 days game time. You will spend an additional $90 just to get their first content update (more or less). $140 spent. That guy that bought the B2P game spent $50 and got their content update for $0. Next content update is down the road even more... so more money spent. Now you could say you'd stop playing until the content drops, thereby saving you money. But therein lies the hole in your theory... if they are using your subscription fee to fund updates, how are they going to get their money if you're not subbed? Who's paying for this content then?
Subscriptions are hogwash. People pay subscriptions to keep playing the game they enjoy, not because of some promise of new content. That expectation was manifested later by the players.
^ Not sure where the confusion is? A few key points that you are missing...
1. I can cancel my sub at anytime if I am not satisfied. If enough people do so it affects the company's drastically which is an incentive for them to maintain a higher standard.
2. B2P (i.e. GW1-2)... They release(d) content very rarely and when they do it's rather minor until they release an expansion pack which you have to pay for regardless. So people play through the game maybe a few x's then log on once every 6 month or so to complete the latest "event". This vastly differs from a game like WoW where every 4 months or so you get an entire new tier of gear/bosses, mounts, pets, dungeons, crafting patterns etc. I don't sub to WoW anymore but you can't possibly compare the amount of content that is released annually in a game like GW2's to WoW, it's not even close. Not to mention that you can count on bi-annual major ex-packs.
3. Expectations. When people describe B2P games they will often start out with statements like, "There is a lot of content for what it is!", implying that because it's B2P don't expect too much. This isn't the case with P2P MMOs, people actually have unrealistic expectations which force the companies to push out content and fix bugs.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Ask yourself this. If MMOs required a box purchase AND a sub, how many would still be kicking? Free games slant the numbers and speak NOTHING of quality.
^ another great point... I have never been a fan of the B2P and F2P MMO model. I would rather pay for quality and be able to demand new content regularly over being at the mercy of the development studio that got all their money up front and no longer has a great deal at stake.
box+ sub games don't mean quality, regular updates or anything else you just tried to attach to it. If anything the f2p game that didn't collect $60 a player has more at stake when trying to get it's development costs back.
That is certainly true. There are "bad" box+sub MMOs as well as "good" and "mediocre" ones. I am not saying what you think I am saying.
What a box+sub does is MAKE players pay for their entertainment. If the entertainment does not meet their "value judgment", they stop paying/playing. When something is free, people will take/use/play it simply because, "It is Free!"
Box+Sub in no way indicates a good game. However, it does indicate if players actually like it.
What about B2P with no sub? You pay for your entertainment there too, and you can pick it up whenever you like.
While the player pays an initial cost, they are not required to pay for any further play. A B2P model with paid expansions and smaller downloads I would accept as a good measure of how players are enjoying their games. But they can still play for free after that initial investment.
Remember, we have many posters here that feel they "have" to play an MMO of any kind. Not a good indicator if an MMO is any good or fun for them. Some may be just "tolerable enough" for them to keep playing to get that "fix."
The gist of my point is that playing for free, or even with a small initial investment, does not indicate a good or popular game to me. Even with B2P, if a player shells out the initial cost, they may not enjoy the game, but their initial investment is still counted as "proof" of a great game. With a sub game, every month a player decides if a game is "fun enough" to re-subscribe, indicating to me a how well that game is liked.
I bought the old GW game and even the newer GW2 game. Even though I do not play them anymore, though I could at any time, my purchase (and possibly account) is counted in their numbers. Not a very good indicator, wouldn't you agree?
WoW is the anomaly, I know. But it shows me that multiple millions of players enjoy the MMO enough to re-sub every month. Sure, you have a small percentage of players that just neglect to "unsubscribe" or players that sub just take a peek at how the game doing, but generally speaking, it is a good overall indicator that most players are enjoying their time in game.
[EDIT] I guess I should clarify that I DO think F2P should exist. It is just when players try to throw F2P numbers at P2P numbers, the comparison stops being between equal items, like Apples to Kiwis. They may both be fruit, but there the similarities stop.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
My biggest complaint is they're just too god damn boring. I mean some have so many pointless quests its unreal and some quests even make you feel insignificant and ripped off for doing them. For example: I did a quest on Everquest 2 that I can not forget to this day; I had to kill some snakes for this dude so he could sell their skins for "gold" which he told me after I returned and rewarded me with some lousy copper pieces.. I mean WTF man..? you're getting gold and all I get is a few lousy copper?! I'd rather beat him to death, take damn skins and sell them for gold myself! >_>
Another complaint I have is how many there are and how most seem more like friggin' money milk cows than anything else. All the stupid cash shops, DLC, and so-called collectors editions out there and lets not forget the ones that practically make you feel like you have no god damn choice but to tap into their pay more options to get anywhere in their god damn game cus the tight b*ds made it too damn hard to just play and enjoy any other way!
Honestly, its times like this when I often wonder why I still bother playing MMOs.
But you DID give the developer all of your money upfront when you bought the game. That covered it's development costs. Everything thereafter is gravy. How is spending $50 to play a game for 30 days promising you new content and spending $50 to play a game forever not promising you new content. You just ASSUME your subscription is being used to generate new content but the reality is, all that content was already in the pipes before you even bought the game.
I just don't fathom this mentality at all. All a subscription does is ALLOW you to continue playing a game that you already paid for. Whether there is or is not any updates to the game has zero to do with your subscription fee. If it did, they'd forego a box price entirely, allow you to download it for free and only let you play it while you have active time on your game card. But they don't do they?
Take the WoD expansion, that's a $50 fee that comes with 30 days game time. You will spend an additional $90 just to get their first content update (more or less). $140 spent. That guy that bought the B2P game spent $50 and got their content update for $0. Next content update is down the road even more... so more money spent. Now you could say you'd stop playing until the content drops, thereby saving you money. But therein lies the hole in your theory... if they are using your subscription fee to fund updates, how are they going to get their money if you're not subbed? Who's paying for this content then?
Subscriptions are hogwash. People pay subscriptions to keep playing the game they enjoy, not because of some promise of new content. That expectation was manifested later by the players.
^ Not sure where the confusion is? A few key points that you are missing...
1. I can cancel my sub at anytime if I am not satisfied. If enough people do so it affects the company's drastically which is an incentive for them to maintain a higher standard.
2. B2P (i.e. GW1-2)... They release(d) content very rarely and when they do it's rather minor until they release an expansion pack which you have to pay for regardless. So people play through the game maybe a few x's then log on once every 6 month or so to complete the latest "event". This vastly differs from a game like WoW where every 4 months or so you get an entire new tier of gear/bosses, mounts, pets, dungeons, crafting patterns etc. I don't sub to WoW anymore but you can't possibly compare the amount of content that is released annually in a game like GW2's to WoW, it's not even close. Not to mention that you can count on bi-annual major ex-packs.
3. Expectations. When people describe B2P games they will often start out with statements like, "There is a lot of content for what it is!", implying that because it's B2P don't expect too much. This isn't the case with P2P MMOs, people actually have unrealistic expectations which force the companies to push out content and fix bugs.
1. Unsubbing doesn't hurt them when they already have been paid. Subscriptions are gravy. You paid for the entire game with the original fee, be it box fee or expansion fee. All that follows is already paid for. What isn't paid for is the next expansion or next game. And guess what, when it comes out, you get to pay for that too.
2. Sure we get to pay for expansions. So do you. Difference is, we DON'T pay for anything in between... you do. We get content updates, more so than what you think. You try to claim a new tier of gear or a new raid instance as substantial content but the reality is, it's not. If it were, people wouldn't be crying over running it for a greater portion of a year. Subscription games have no better track record of content updates than F2P games.
3. No, that's your interpretation of it. I expect a lot of the games that I pay for. B2P is a paid for game. F2P is another story. I didn't pay to play the game. My B2P games get updates, bug fixes, you name it. If they didn't, I wouldn't buy them again.
So in REALITY, you and I paid the same thing for a game. We both get content updates, mine are free, your's cost money. I can play whenever and however I want, you have to pay an entry fee to your own game. We both pay for expansions. How is a sub in your game doing anything but lining their pockets?
I am so sick of people being stuck on this linear, quest grindy, reward driven, level-based progression model.
We have the ability to play these games differently, yet we chose not to and complain that they aren't different. I would love to see a change in mentality that would actually allow for different types of MMOs to exist. I would love to see more sandboxy games that don't rely heavily on quests or pvp. But I would love to see them actually thrive, instead of being really small, clunky, niche genres.
I'd love to see more RPGs using the zelda model of progression. Obtain tools to allow you to traverse more of the gameworld, over simply getting a high enough lvl to survive.
I'd love to see more interactive combat (I miss the skillchain system FFXI had, for example).
I'm not huge on crafting, but it would also be nice to see more interesting crafting systems in these games. Though again, if it's too intricate, people don't seem to bother using them.
- Though, I will also say that I've met a lot of really great people through these games. So it really has been a mixed bag. I just wish the status quo was a bit different. Maybe in a few years.
Nail on the head!
Seeing you brought up FFXI... let's continue along that road. I miss what FFXI offered when it came to community and communication. People took the time to talk to one another, not troll the chat-ways. Modern MMO games and players have created a toxic community of griefers and trolls that do not even try to fit into a game world nor be a part of the game world.
Skill chains in FFXI were nice... LOTRO also had a similar system.
You can't have the kind of community you used to have with modern, fast paced, combat in MMOs. If I wanted to smash buttons as fast as I can I would play street fighter.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Ask yourself this. If MMOs required a box purchase AND a sub, how many would still be kicking? Free games slant the numbers and speak NOTHING of quality.
^ another great point... I have never been a fan of the B2P and F2P MMO model. I would rather pay for quality and be able to demand new content regularly over being at the mercy of the development studio that got all their money up front and no longer has a great deal at stake.
box+ sub games don't mean quality, regular updates or anything else you just tried to attach to it. If anything the f2p game that didn't collect $60 a player has more at stake when trying to get it's development costs back.
That is certainly true. There are "bad" box+sub MMOs as well as "good" and "mediocre" ones. I am not saying what you think I am saying.
What a box+sub does is MAKE players pay for their entertainment. If the entertainment does not meet their "value judgment", they stop paying/playing. When something is free, people will take/use/play it simply because, "It is Free!"
Box+Sub in no way indicates a good game. However, it does indicate if players actually like it.
What about B2P with no sub? You pay for your entertainment there too, and you can pick it up whenever you like.
While the player pays an initial cost, they are not required to pay for any further play. A B2P model with paid expansions and smaller downloads I would accept as a good measure of how players are enjoying their games. But they can still play for free after that initial investment.
Remember, we have many posters here that feel they "have" to play an MMO of any kind. Not a good indicator if an MMO is any good or fun for them. Some may be just "tolerable enough" for them to keep playing to get that "fix."
The gist of my point is that playing for free, or even with a small initial investment, does not indicate a good or popular game to me. Even with B2P, if a player shells out the initial cost, they may not enjoy the game, but their initial investment is still counted as "proof" of a great game. With a sub game, every month a player decides if a game is "fun enough" to re-subscribe, indicating to me a how well that game is liked.
I bought the old GW game and even the newer GW2 game. Even though I do not play them anymore, though I could at any time, my purchase (and possibly account) is counted in their numbers. Not a very good indicator, wouldn't you agree?
WoW is the anomaly, I know. But it shows me that multiple millions of players enjoy the MMO enough to re-sub every month. Sure, you have a small percentage of players that just neglect to "unsubscribe" or players that sub just take a peek at how the game doing, but generally speaking, it is a good overall indicator that most players are enjoying their time in game.
[EDIT] I guess I should clarify that I DO think F2P should exist. It is just when players try to throw F2P numbers at P2P numbers, the comparison stops being between equal items, like Apples to Kiwis. They may both be fruit, but there the similarities stop.
Gotcha. So subscription numbers tend to be an indicator of how good or popular a game is, while in a F2P/B2P system, the numbers can be skewed by those who spend an extraoardinary amount.
I bought the old GW game and even the newer GW2 game. Even though I do not play them anymore, though I could at any time, my purchase (and possibly account) is counted in their numbers. Not a very good indicator, wouldn't you agree?
GW2 is a great example of this... ANet boasts over 3 million copies sold yet there are around 400 - 500k active members today. This essentially means that only 14% of the people that purchased this game find it worth still playing, that is terrible regardless of what initial sales were.
So in REALITY, you and I paid the same thing for a game. We both get content updates, mine are free, your's cost money. I can play whenever and however I want, you have to pay an entry fee to your own game. We both pay for expansions. How is a sub in your game doing anything but lining their pockets?
I guess I just don't mind paying for services rendered, not sure why so many people are opposed to this concept?? You do realize that development is not the only cost involved when it comes to MMOs right? There are things like hardware, networking, bandwidth, etc. I honestly don't mind paying a nominal fee for something that gives me 20 + hours of fun each month, heck I can't play a round of golf for $15.
Originally posted by jdizzle2k13 Gotcha. So subscription numbers tend to be an indicator of how good or popular a game is, while in a F2P/B2P system, the numbers can be skewed by those who spend an extraoardinary amount.
Why could I not have said that in the first place? D'OH!
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
The pace of most of the newer MMORPG's is too fast. Encouraging people not to bother reading text, spam clicking, not taking the time to enjoy the experience, explore and take in the visuals, everything has to be in a hurry and really spoils the fun.
MMO's used to be more about the fun of completing goals, quests, gaining a level, earning a new piece of equipment, beating a boss, socializing with the community.
Now it seems to be more about the elitists, pvp, getting max level and gear for your class/job.
Originally posted by VengeSunsoar F2p and b2p games often count monthly users. Not simply the total number of prior who ever tried it.
You are correct. Often times they do. However, when players go comparing games, it is rare that total numbers are not used. Also, trying to pin down many F2P/B2P MMO player numbers can be hard indeed With a sub MMO, you have relatively easy access to their financials.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
But you are dead on about NO IMMERSION. I play a character and it feels just like me playing a character. That is bad. I want to feel like I am the character.
I think MMO's should have a balance between the sandbox and the scripted aspects - and both integrating to deliver a plot. The game will let you do some "real-world" things, or stuff you can do in the world at your own accord. Then the scripted events have to be smartly done to get your customized character and have it melded into the game-world / the plot. If focused too much on just quests and activities leading to farming, you will get bored players, who are tired of cookie-cutter grinding. I think creativity in game design need not be limited by the quest templates (but you will still use them), but can be backed-up by content. Scenarios and characters that MMO players can interact with, fight with, and overall, appreciate to find the connection to the game world and the game itself.
The fact that there are now players who spend more time in forums, sometimes literally for months or years, bashing a game rather than finding one that they enjoy.
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
Originally posted by Vorch The fact that there are now players who spend more time in forums, sometimes literally for months or years, bashing a game rather than finding one that they enjoy.
Well, if the genre wasn't in a 10 year dark age, maybe there'd be more MMOs for the veterans of the genre?
Originally posted by Vorch The fact that there are now players who spend more time in forums, sometimes literally for months or years, bashing a game rather than finding one that they enjoy.
This is an odd complaint. If you do not like it, you can simply avoid it all by not coming to forums. It is not like what others do on forums impact your fun.
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Ask yourself this. If MMOs required a box purchase AND a sub, how many would still be kicking? Free games slant the numbers and speak NOTHING of quality.
^ another great point... I have never been a fan of the B2P and F2P MMO model. I would rather pay for quality and be able to demand new content regularly over being at the mercy of the development studio that got all their money up front and no longer has a great deal at stake.
box+ sub games don't mean quality, regular updates or anything else you just tried to attach to it. If anything the f2p game that didn't collect $60 a player has more at stake when trying to get it's development costs back.
That is certainly true. There are "bad" box+sub MMOs as well as "good" and "mediocre" ones. I am not saying what you think I am saying.
What a box+sub does is MAKE players pay for their entertainment. If the entertainment does not meet their "value judgment", they stop paying/playing. When something is free, people will take/use/play it simply because, "It is Free!"
Box+Sub in no way indicates a good game. However, it does indicate if players actually like it.
That was true back when there was only subs but players are different now and so is the market. I wont buy a box anymore but I also wont devote my full time to an mmo without paying the sub option. I have no issue paying for the time I spend in a game but the market has shown me that if they want me to play I don't need to buy my way in.
Too many times I paid for a box only to have it either go free or it just sucked. There's no risk with a free game and they have to work for my money or I leave. It's not the great evil so many seem to think it is...at least not in my opinion.
I don't support the idea that a game has to be 100% free and you never spend any money on anything though. That's just people being stupid.
Originally posted by Vorch The fact that there are now players who spend more time in forums, sometimes literally for months or years, bashing a game rather than finding one that they enjoy.
This is an odd complaint. If you do not like it, you can simply avoid it all by not coming to forums. It is not like what others do on forums impact your fun.
Exactly. The majority of the time I come to forums, I offer words of encouragement, including to games that I don't currently play. However, I am often easily pulled in to obvious baiting...
It helps just to leave and remember that someone else's opinion and crusade against a game you like is THEIR problem, not yours.
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
Originally posted by AlBQuirky Ask yourself this. If MMOs required a box purchase AND a sub, how many would still be kicking? Free games slant the numbers and speak NOTHING of quality.
^ another great point... I have never been a fan of the B2P and F2P MMO model. I would rather pay for quality and be able to demand new content regularly over being at the mercy of the development studio that got all their money up front and no longer has a great deal at stake.
box+ sub games don't mean quality, regular updates or anything else you just tried to attach to it. If anything the f2p game that didn't collect $60 a player has more at stake when trying to get it's development costs back.
That is certainly true. There are "bad" box+sub MMOs as well as "good" and "mediocre" ones. I am not saying what you think I am saying.
What a box+sub does is MAKE players pay for their entertainment. If the entertainment does not meet their "value judgment", they stop paying/playing. When something is free, people will take/use/play it simply because, "It is Free!"
Box+Sub in no way indicates a good game. However, it does indicate if players actually like it.
That was true back when there was only subs but players are different now and so is the market. I wont buy a box anymore but I also wont devote my full time to an mmo without paying the sub option. I have no issue paying for the time I spend in a game but the market has shown me that if they want me to play I don't need to buy my way in.
Too many times I paid for a box only to have it either go free or it just sucked. There's no risk with a free game and they have to work for my money or I leave. It's not the great evil so many seem to think it is...at least not in my opinion.
I don't support the idea that a game has to be 100% free and you never spend any money on anything though. That's just people being stupid.
I totally agree with you, I'm the same way. I no longer buy the box and the only way I'll play long-term is subbing because even games with a great F2P model either don't include the whole enchilada or gives you lots of perks that you don't get with F2P and I don't want any restrictions whatsoever to my play experience, and if the game sucks or just feels like the same old grind with a new skin then I don't sub and quit playing. $15/mo to play as many hours a day as I want is dirt cheap compared to other forms of entertainment.
I think my biggest complaint is that these days, content seems to be aimed at the locust; designed to be consumed rapidly and repeatedly and then spit out in favor of the next new thing, which might be new content in the same game.
When I play an mmo, I expect (and my experience has shaped this) to meet new people, make friends and play that game for years. When the content seems to be aimed at the short-term player, my expectations are not met and it's disappointing to have to look around for a new place to hang my mmo hat.
I test a lot of mmos, play around in the ones I like and devote most of my game time and gaming dollars to one game. So I look for types of content that can produce player longevity.
My number one complaint about most modern day MMOs is that they lack immersion. Games are so focused on features, balance, storyline, etc but most seem to lack the ability to make the gamer feel attached and immersed in their character and in the game.
I know some will say that storyline is what captures the gamer but I would disagree. Sure storyline and it's delivery are important but these things by themselves do not captivate most gamers. A good example is watching a sport verses playing a sport, which is similar to what I am talking about with most modern MMOs. When I first picked up EQ and WoW I felt like I was the story, my character was part of a ever changing digital world and my purpose there was to pwn players and NPCs alike. I have yet to play a game since TBC WoW that has made me feel like that. I was never particularly immersed in the WoW storyline but I was deeply immersed in my character and I felt as if he had a purpose inside that digital world.
My #1 complaint is Community these days. I guess it's the price of Mainstream popularity that MMO's gained since the glory days of UO/EQ/AC, with the masses comes masses of sub-par players with little patience, imagination or the ability to exercise critical thinking.
IMHO, even the trash talking in PvP is lame & boring these days (I blame the same low-intelligence masses).
If i was forced to boil it down it would be 2 fold.
1. Lack of group interdependency from the very early game (i.e. ultra focus on soloability)
2. "Story Driven" content (includes questing).
Elaboration:
1. I was there from the early days back with EQ. I remember having long discussions on the wonderous things we would see in 10 years in the MMO genre. Sadly the genre went in the complete opposite direction. MMOs when they came out were about 2 things, 1. Having a a large open world that continued on while you logged off, and 2. Being MULTIPLAYER. That meant, actually needing to group with people to accomplish things. That doesnt mean there weren't things you could do solo, but it certainly wasnt the primary focus of the game like it is now.
2. IMO this is probably responsible for the complete lack of immersion in MMOs right now. I dont neccesarily mind a large multistep over arching storyline, but having a bunch of little fetch and carry/killquests and little mini stories for everyone zone and blah blah is just flat stupid to me. In a game like EQ, if you wanted XP, you killed things. You could generally kill things more efficiently and get bonuses for grouping. This caused people to group together and while you were grouping you chatted and such. Also, slower leveling and harder content meant you needed to A. work together and discuss strategy, and B. You actually saw roughly the same gruop of people day in and day out because it wasn't such a stupidly fast leveling curve where if someone who could play 8 hours a day vs your 5 hours a day would end up 20 levels ahead of you over the course of a week. This caused you to build relationships, recognize people, etc. The problem everyone has experienced with questing based leveling systems is that if you are on step 2 of 5 and someone else is on step 4 of 5, you can't work together without causing either person to be doing something less efficient. If at the very least the game companies made killing mobs a reasonable amount of xp then you could at least console yourself by saying, well if i help this person get caught up to me im still getting decent XP. But no, mob kill xp is usually 1/10th of the xp from completing the quest. So there goes that incentive. Personally i think its hubris, i think these devs want you to experience the glory of their awesome quest writing abilities so they basically force you into that path by making mob killing and dungeon running xp complete crap.
Anyways, im rambling, but those are my 2 main issues.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
well, mobplacement would be my biggest gripe, there should be some sort of dynamic spawns and enemy npc levels by killing eachother and if players kill a spwan point that spawn point moves and so on creating a dynamic playingfield that makes you move around in the world chasing that illusive dragons gold or that orc that somehow became a lv thousand npc. oh and loot should be resource based based on what the thing that died was wearing/using and if a dragon kills alot of players his gold deposit grows and so on.
This has not been done as far as i know and im missing it.
Sick of this cross faction all in same guild and different sides on same server crap. I want an enemy that I can't talk to and who can't talk to me, if I see them I want to pull my sword and run at them with hatred in my eyes and them to do the same. I dont want to see an opposing faction and know him from my guild or have them say hello how are you or invite me to a group .
Comments
^ Not sure where the confusion is? A few key points that you are missing...
1. I can cancel my sub at anytime if I am not satisfied. If enough people do so it affects the company's drastically which is an incentive for them to maintain a higher standard.
2. B2P (i.e. GW1-2)... They release(d) content very rarely and when they do it's rather minor until they release an expansion pack which you have to pay for regardless. So people play through the game maybe a few x's then log on once every 6 month or so to complete the latest "event". This vastly differs from a game like WoW where every 4 months or so you get an entire new tier of gear/bosses, mounts, pets, dungeons, crafting patterns etc. I don't sub to WoW anymore but you can't possibly compare the amount of content that is released annually in a game like GW2's to WoW, it's not even close. Not to mention that you can count on bi-annual major ex-packs.
3. Expectations. When people describe B2P games they will often start out with statements like, "There is a lot of content for what it is!", implying that because it's B2P don't expect too much. This isn't the case with P2P MMOs, people actually have unrealistic expectations which force the companies to push out content and fix bugs.
Remember, we have many posters here that feel they "have" to play an MMO of any kind. Not a good indicator if an MMO is any good or fun for them. Some may be just "tolerable enough" for them to keep playing to get that "fix."
The gist of my point is that playing for free, or even with a small initial investment, does not indicate a good or popular game to me. Even with B2P, if a player shells out the initial cost, they may not enjoy the game, but their initial investment is still counted as "proof" of a great game. With a sub game, every month a player decides if a game is "fun enough" to re-subscribe, indicating to me a how well that game is liked.
I bought the old GW game and even the newer GW2 game. Even though I do not play them anymore, though I could at any time, my purchase (and possibly account) is counted in their numbers. Not a very good indicator, wouldn't you agree?
WoW is the anomaly, I know. But it shows me that multiple millions of players enjoy the MMO enough to re-sub every month. Sure, you have a small percentage of players that just neglect to "unsubscribe" or players that sub just take a peek at how the game doing, but generally speaking, it is a good overall indicator that most players are enjoying their time in game.
[EDIT]
I guess I should clarify that I DO think F2P should exist. It is just when players try to throw F2P numbers at P2P numbers, the comparison stops being between equal items, like Apples to Kiwis. They may both be fruit, but there the similarities stop.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
My biggest complaint is they're just too god damn boring. I mean some have so many pointless quests its unreal and some quests even make you feel insignificant and ripped off for doing them. For example: I did a quest on Everquest 2 that I can not forget to this day; I had to kill some snakes for this dude so he could sell their skins for "gold" which he told me after I returned and rewarded me with some lousy copper pieces.. I mean WTF man..? you're getting gold and all I get is a few lousy copper?! I'd rather beat him to death, take damn skins and sell them for gold myself! >_>
Another complaint I have is how many there are and how most seem more like friggin' money milk cows than anything else. All the stupid cash shops, DLC, and so-called collectors editions out there and lets not forget the ones that practically make you feel like you have no god damn choice but to tap into their pay more options to get anywhere in their god damn game cus the tight b*ds made it too damn hard to just play and enjoy any other way!
Honestly, its times like this when I often wonder why I still bother playing MMOs.
1. Unsubbing doesn't hurt them when they already have been paid. Subscriptions are gravy. You paid for the entire game with the original fee, be it box fee or expansion fee. All that follows is already paid for. What isn't paid for is the next expansion or next game. And guess what, when it comes out, you get to pay for that too.
2. Sure we get to pay for expansions. So do you. Difference is, we DON'T pay for anything in between... you do. We get content updates, more so than what you think. You try to claim a new tier of gear or a new raid instance as substantial content but the reality is, it's not. If it were, people wouldn't be crying over running it for a greater portion of a year. Subscription games have no better track record of content updates than F2P games.
3. No, that's your interpretation of it. I expect a lot of the games that I pay for. B2P is a paid for game. F2P is another story. I didn't pay to play the game. My B2P games get updates, bug fixes, you name it. If they didn't, I wouldn't buy them again.
So in REALITY, you and I paid the same thing for a game. We both get content updates, mine are free, your's cost money. I can play whenever and however I want, you have to pay an entry fee to your own game. We both pay for expansions. How is a sub in your game doing anything but lining their pockets?
You can't have the kind of community you used to have with modern, fast paced, combat in MMOs. If I wanted to smash buttons as fast as I can I would play street fighter.
Gotcha. So subscription numbers tend to be an indicator of how good or popular a game is, while in a F2P/B2P system, the numbers can be skewed by those who spend an extraoardinary amount.
GW2 is a great example of this... ANet boasts over 3 million copies sold yet there are around 400 - 500k active members today. This essentially means that only 14% of the people that purchased this game find it worth still playing, that is terrible regardless of what initial sales were.
I guess I just don't mind paying for services rendered, not sure why so many people are opposed to this concept?? You do realize that development is not the only cost involved when it comes to MMOs right? There are things like hardware, networking, bandwidth, etc. I honestly don't mind paying a nominal fee for something that gives me 20 + hours of fun each month, heck I can't play a round of golf for $15.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
The pace of most of the newer MMORPG's is too fast. Encouraging people not to bother reading text, spam clicking, not taking the time to enjoy the experience, explore and take in the visuals, everything has to be in a hurry and really spoils the fun.
MMO's used to be more about the fun of completing goals, quests, gaining a level, earning a new piece of equipment, beating a boss, socializing with the community.
Now it seems to be more about the elitists, pvp, getting max level and gear for your class/job.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
Well, if the genre wasn't in a 10 year dark age, maybe there'd be more MMOs for the veterans of the genre?
This is an odd complaint. If you do not like it, you can simply avoid it all by not coming to forums. It is not like what others do on forums impact your fun.
That was true back when there was only subs but players are different now and so is the market. I wont buy a box anymore but I also wont devote my full time to an mmo without paying the sub option. I have no issue paying for the time I spend in a game but the market has shown me that if they want me to play I don't need to buy my way in.
Too many times I paid for a box only to have it either go free or it just sucked. There's no risk with a free game and they have to work for my money or I leave. It's not the great evil so many seem to think it is...at least not in my opinion.
I don't support the idea that a game has to be 100% free and you never spend any money on anything though. That's just people being stupid.
Exactly. The majority of the time I come to forums, I offer words of encouragement, including to games that I don't currently play. However, I am often easily pulled in to obvious baiting...
It helps just to leave and remember that someone else's opinion and crusade against a game you like is THEIR problem, not yours.
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
Waypoints.
Waypoints.
Follow this trail and arrow and bright area on a map to this waypoint!
Why aren't more MMOs using things like.. "Investigation" or "Insight" skills? It's made a whole generation of lazy gamers.
a yo ho ho
I totally agree with you, I'm the same way. I no longer buy the box and the only way I'll play long-term is subbing because even games with a great F2P model either don't include the whole enchilada or gives you lots of perks that you don't get with F2P and I don't want any restrictions whatsoever to my play experience, and if the game sucks or just feels like the same old grind with a new skin then I don't sub and quit playing. $15/mo to play as many hours a day as I want is dirt cheap compared to other forms of entertainment.
I think my biggest complaint is that these days, content seems to be aimed at the locust; designed to be consumed rapidly and repeatedly and then spit out in favor of the next new thing, which might be new content in the same game.
When I play an mmo, I expect (and my experience has shaped this) to meet new people, make friends and play that game for years. When the content seems to be aimed at the short-term player, my expectations are not met and it's disappointing to have to look around for a new place to hang my mmo hat.
I test a lot of mmos, play around in the ones I like and devote most of my game time and gaming dollars to one game. So I look for types of content that can produce player longevity.
My #1 complaint is Community these days. I guess it's the price of Mainstream popularity that MMO's gained since the glory days of UO/EQ/AC, with the masses comes masses of sub-par players with little patience, imagination or the ability to exercise critical thinking.
IMHO, even the trash talking in PvP is lame & boring these days (I blame the same low-intelligence masses).
If i was forced to boil it down it would be 2 fold.
1. Lack of group interdependency from the very early game (i.e. ultra focus on soloability)
2. "Story Driven" content (includes questing).
Elaboration:
1. I was there from the early days back with EQ. I remember having long discussions on the wonderous things we would see in 10 years in the MMO genre. Sadly the genre went in the complete opposite direction. MMOs when they came out were about 2 things, 1. Having a a large open world that continued on while you logged off, and 2. Being MULTIPLAYER. That meant, actually needing to group with people to accomplish things. That doesnt mean there weren't things you could do solo, but it certainly wasnt the primary focus of the game like it is now.
2. IMO this is probably responsible for the complete lack of immersion in MMOs right now. I dont neccesarily mind a large multistep over arching storyline, but having a bunch of little fetch and carry/killquests and little mini stories for everyone zone and blah blah is just flat stupid to me. In a game like EQ, if you wanted XP, you killed things. You could generally kill things more efficiently and get bonuses for grouping. This caused people to group together and while you were grouping you chatted and such. Also, slower leveling and harder content meant you needed to A. work together and discuss strategy, and B. You actually saw roughly the same gruop of people day in and day out because it wasn't such a stupidly fast leveling curve where if someone who could play 8 hours a day vs your 5 hours a day would end up 20 levels ahead of you over the course of a week. This caused you to build relationships, recognize people, etc. The problem everyone has experienced with questing based leveling systems is that if you are on step 2 of 5 and someone else is on step 4 of 5, you can't work together without causing either person to be doing something less efficient. If at the very least the game companies made killing mobs a reasonable amount of xp then you could at least console yourself by saying, well if i help this person get caught up to me im still getting decent XP. But no, mob kill xp is usually 1/10th of the xp from completing the quest. So there goes that incentive. Personally i think its hubris, i think these devs want you to experience the glory of their awesome quest writing abilities so they basically force you into that path by making mob killing and dungeon running xp complete crap.
Anyways, im rambling, but those are my 2 main issues.
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently."
- Friedrich Nietzsche
well, mobplacement would be my biggest gripe, there should be some sort of dynamic spawns and enemy npc levels by killing eachother and if players kill a spwan point that spawn point moves and so on creating a dynamic playingfield that makes you move around in the world chasing that illusive dragons gold or that orc that somehow became a lv thousand npc. oh and loot should be resource based based on what the thing that died was wearing/using and if a dragon kills alot of players his gold deposit grows and so on.
This has not been done as far as i know and im missing it.
Herald of innovation, Vanquisher of the old! - Awake a few hours almost everyday!
Sick of this cross faction all in same guild and different sides on same server crap. I want an enemy that I can't talk to and who can't talk to me, if I see them I want to pull my sword and run at them with hatred in my eyes and them to do the same. I dont want to see an opposing faction and know him from my guild or have them say hello how are you or invite me to a group .
BRING BACK FACTIONS THAT MEAN SOMETHNIG