Originally posted by mindw0rk Subs model for MMOs is dead and most players including me are happy about it. Deal with it
Dead? Really? I guess those of us that are playing them are just playing figments of our imagination then. I really must see my Doctor and get some stronger meds then, or I need to try that one size fits all white dinner jacket out and go to the hotel where I can sleep anyway because the floors and walls are all padded. I hear the food isn't very good but the sleeping accommodations are very comfy.
there are only a couple of mmorpgs with subscriptions still . some had them in the past and when the user base declines they go F2P . its more accurate to say the subscription based system was dealt a mortal blow . while it isn't dead right now its dieing and has been for years
Most actually have subscriptions. The only difference is some have optional subscriptions but those usually make up for it with a particularly obnoxious cash shop It's not really even a question of F2P vs sub anymore. It's a question of if the have a cash shop (most do) how bad is the cash shop and are you willing to pay a sub to avoid the really obnoxious aspects of the cash shop?
Personally I think games which both have a mandatory sub and a non-cosmetic only cash shop can fuck right off I rather a bad F2P model to that.
I believe that game developers should at least charge for a game. Make it not F2P. As well as make the game subscription based. You see, through the years I have watched mmo companies survive by makinga horrible or mediocre games f2p with cash shop options.
As long as we the player have f2p mmos. The chances of us ever seeing that ultimate mmo is very slim. It is my belief that game developers and companies should die out or go away if they cannot make a good mmo. Rather than hang on and try to make that good game by suckering players into the ftp cash shop venue. That way those developers which are truly talented can offer us the player a more substantive, outstanding, mmorpg to play. The point is simple. If you cannot make a good mmo now, what makes you think any of your derived conclusions to a new mmo to work towards will be any better?
Just as in the stock market. The mmo companies should follow the make or break ideology. Rather than the socialistic substandard gaming that many developers offer now. I know some companies do offer subs as well as f2p. I would offer let go of those and stick with the games people like.
I know some of you would disagree with me. (IMO)But until there is a change in the current industry the great mmo will never return!
What do you think needs to change in the mmo industry?
Disagree. In the grand scheme of gaming, MMO gaming has the fewest playerbase in the industry. I'll give you ONE reason why this is so:
If you said "the business model" then ding ding ding we have a winner!
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I think all developers should use a business model that generates positive revenue and that fits with how their consumer wants to spend their money.
Why does this have to be in game perks? There surely has to be some other way to increase revenue. It is a fact that games (all games) benefit from limiting the disparity between players.
I think all developers should use a business model that generates positive revenue and that fits with how their consumer wants to spend their money.
Why does this have to be in game perks? There surely has to be some other way to increase revenue. It is a fact that games (all games) benefit from limiting the disparity between players.
I said nothing about in-game perks. Were you confused or was that just a horrible attempt at a strawman?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Extended periods of free trials should be in order then, like 1 months, plus another if you fulfill certain conditions, so that it's not just a free giveaway. Saying this because it is inevitable that there will be that rushed-out sub game too. Sub games can fail as much as F2P too.
sometimes people forget that companies are made to make profit. But also... how do you make a profit if you have an mmo where no one plays? This is why free-to-play games are made. Because somewhere out there.. there are gamers who are willing to pay to enjoy the game more. Especially those who don't have the luxury to play like those who just stays at home.
The best example of a game that was funded by subscription only, with no micro-transactions is Lego Universe. Whatever was needed in the game was earned, traded, gifted from another player, or given through codes from Lego. Everyone had an equal ability to advance in the game. Unfortunately, it did not receive the publicity it needed to survive.
When Disney bought Club Penguin, they began to bring back rare items for sale. Once in a lifetime items. KingsIsle has done the same thing. in Wizard101 and Pirate101. Bringing back exclusive, rare, never to be seen again items, is the worst type of micro-transactions in Gaming.
I despise micro-transactions. I would support subscriptions to rid Gaming of what micro-transactiolns has done ... it's despicable.
Quite frankly, most MMOs don't deserve to be P2P, including the current P2P ones. The only MMO I can think of that deserved to be P2P was Trion's RIFT solely for the reason that, unlike other companies, Trion was actually updating their game at an insane speed with new content that made paying monthly seem like you were actually getting something for your money rather than just paying a loan for the right to play your character(s). Now how many other current P2P titles can boast to have this update speed? Pretty sure that number is close to 0.
I don't think they totally have to do away with free to play games, but I know where the poster is coming from. A vast majority of the f2p titles I have tried are just money grabs. A prime example of this is Neverwinter, they have one of the worst f2p I have every seen. Even worse than SWTOR was when it first went f2p, which is somewhat better now over time. Games like the one I stated have actually removed in game items to make them shop items only at this point. People tend to spend more money on f2p than p2p in most cases.
With that said I do find that I prefer p2p more because it usually stops a lot of the people that just make accounts over and over to harass people. Gold farmers being the only ones that will do it in a paying system most of the time because they have to buy new accounts when banned.
Something I wouldn't mind seeing is official forums being linked to the players true names or emails with no way to create accounts just to bad mouth games or harass people. They are doing this in China as we speak for social networks ect.... I don't think it is a bad thing. Would stop a lot of the incredible amount of bile a lot of people spew online.
Originally posted by MadnessRealm Quite frankly, most MMOs don't deserve to be P2P, including the current P2P ones. The only MMO I can think of that deserved to be P2P was Trion's RIFT solely for the reason that, unlike other companies, Trion was actually updating their game at an insane speed with new content that made paying monthly seem like you were actually getting something for your money rather than just paying a loan for the right to play your character(s). Now how many other current P2P titles can boast to have this update speed? Pretty sure that number is close to 0.
I can agree with this somewhat. I wish game companies were forced to release information on exactly were subs revenue was spent, since it is a contract with the customer. If at least half didn't go into future development the game should be shut down. I could see half going for staffing/maintenance.
Future games have a lot less chance of sucking if they're P2P. Most current games aren't good enough to be P2P though so wouldn't recommend them switching over. Don't even want to think of what the greedier companies would do but I can guess a P2P system + invasion cash shop.
Cash shops make every game I've ever played worse, that's reason enough to do away with them. You can't really argue against it since even now the most successful MMO is P2P(WoW).
I don't not believe the payment model has any real tangible effect on quality of product. Not sure why socialism is always equated to f2p. I blame the current popular boogie man use of the word. Neither the government nor any other group owns a f2p MMO as far as I know. They appear to me to be highly capitalistic. The current MMO climate has boat loads of competition making it healthy capitalism. Will this always produce quality? Well, no companies will try and max profits because the investment isn't made to produce the ultimate MMO it's made to produce profit. What are you asking for some kind of self imposed regulation on the MMO payment model? Because you decided that is the only way an MMO can have success?
At the end of the day if you believe subscription == quality then only buy subscription games. You are correct in saying others will disagree, we can see that in the MMO market place.
Another year, another pointless tirade against specific business models.
Let's not forget that companies are in the business to make money. Their products need to earn money to stay viable and keep the company (and its investors) satisfied. Every business model since the inception of businesses has been to maximize the revenue and turn it into profit. For now, games have found a new, current sweet-spot of income production, micro-transactions. We are seeing the gaming industry go through the same transition as traditional periodical (magazines) and daily (newspaper) publishing; these industries couldn't generate the revenues with the subscription model, either.
Customers always have the option, pay or not. They have no leverage on business practices or policies. It's a like-it-or-lump-it situation, pay the price for the product or don't play. That's the limit of the players' options.
I don't mind how the companies produce games and fund themselves. What I care about is having a good game to play when I want to. If the product is good enough, and my desire to play is great enough, the pricing is within my means, then I may choose to participate in their economy and pay them money. If not, I simply look for another game, I don't try to change how Company X does business.
If they were charging you by getting to come over monthly and kick your dog/cat/parakeet/whatever, then there would be legitimate moral grounds to be offended.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I just think that it's depressing that people are not equal in MMORPGs anymore, since subscription MMORPGs died out.
When there were still non-cash shop MMORPGs, people were equal. It didn't matter whether you were a rich kid in real life or a student scrounging up some coins each day, people in the game were the same. Not anymore. The guy next to you has a mount that looks better than yours? Buy one in the cash shop. You are gaining XP not quickly enough? Buy XP boosts. You keep dying in PvP? Buy equipment with stats.
I just think that it's depressing that people are not equal in MMORPGs anymore, since subscription MMORPGs died out.
When there were still non-cash shop MMORPGs, people were equal. It didn't matter whether you were a rich kid in real life or a student scrounging up some coins each day, people in the game were the same. Not anymore. The guy next to you has a mount that looks better than yours? Buy one in the cash shop. You are gaining XP not quickly enough? Buy XP boosts. You keep dying in PvP? Buy equipment with stats.
It was never equal though was it, if you had more time you could be more powerful. I would argue that because of that there has always been people looking for ways to even the playing field. Gold selling, exploiting, and hacks far pre-date F2P. Because they see the need and they could never stop it companies have come up with a way to make money off it now.
From a financial POV yes. But as a gamer I have a conscience. I want the best experience a gamer can have. Currently there are very few titles that offer such.
So from a financial point of view companies need to make good decisions or else they are out of a job and maybe even in debt.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Just as in the stock market. The mmo companies should follow the make or break ideology. Rather than the socialistic substandard gaming that many developers offer now. I know some companies do offer subs as well as f2p. I would offer let go of those and stick with the games people like.
I know some of you would disagree with me. (IMO)But until there is a change in the current industry the great mmo will never return!
What do you think needs to change in the mmo industry?
Well, as popular as subscriptions are (on this site), I hate to say but there is a metric ton of market data that shows subscriptions are not a good idea right now. All those 'crappy little f2p mmos' are actually making money, and many of them also cost a fraction to develop. Most of the subscription games? Less so.
If you want to change the mmo industry, you need to start with yourself (the player).
Most gamers (especially on this site) don't take responsibility for anything. They make demands of developers, criticize everything under the sun, and insist that they are smarter than everyone else (i know, a massive generalization here). However, very few of us challenge our own opinions. Very few of us reflect, to see how much of what we say has actually been right, and how many predictions / claims we've made have actually been wrong. Or what those mistakes would mean if they were to actually go into effect.
Furthermore, very few of us gamers take a long hard look at what we actually want from our games. What specifically we want. Not some nebulous wishlist that has no details, but just a bunch of ideologies. I'm talking about specifics. What mechanics we like, what other mechanics tend to work well with them. How important aesthetics (art design) is too our actual enjoyment of the game, and how much of that is superficial. How many games have we tried without forming assumptions & preconceptions before we even enter the loading screen.
These are things that not only help us become better consumers (by helping us identify things we don't like before we give them our money), but also helps us actually tell the developers what we really want. Because I can tell you, nothing is more frustrating than having to decipher what a bunch of idiots on the internet actually want. And yet developers have to do it every day. Most people are very bad at articulating what they want, and just expect others to reach into their brains and make it happen. Afaik, people don't actually have that ability yet.
- So, be smart. Be a better gamer. Go back and play older games. Figure out what you actually want, and start supporting the games & studios that are actually doing it. And if no one is doing it? If it means enough to you, start small / find some friends, make a simplified version as a game (proof of concept). You never know where it will lead you, and you'll actually see first hand what it's like to make a game.
Another year, another pointless tirade against specific business models.
Let's not forget that companies are in the business to make money. Their products need to earn money to stay viable and keep the company (and its investors) satisfied. Every business model since the inception of businesses has been to maximize the revenue and turn it into profit. For now, games have found a new, current sweet-spot of income production, micro-transactions. We are seeing the gaming industry go through the same transition as traditional periodical (magazines) and daily (newspaper) publishing; these industries couldn't generate the revenues with the subscription model, either.
Customers always have the option, pay or not. They have no leverage on business practices or policies. It's a like-it-or-lump-it situation, pay the price for the product or don't play. That's the limit of the players' options.
I don't mind how the companies produce games and fund themselves. What I care about is having a good game to play when I want to. If the product is good enough, and my desire to play is great enough, the pricing is within my means, then I may choose to participate in their economy and pay them money. If not, I simply look for another game, I don't try to change how Company X does business.
If they were charging you by getting to come over monthly and kick your dog/cat/parakeet/whatever, then there would be legitimate moral grounds to be offended.
This ^
It's like people have developed the assumption that they have the right to design other people's games for them. There are more good games out than we've ever had, and many of them get overlooked, or passed over for 'this years latest hotness'.
Play what you enjoy, and stop giving money to the rest.
I just think that it's depressing that people are not equal in MMORPGs anymore, since subscription MMORPGs died out.
When there were still non-cash shop MMORPGs, people were equal. It didn't matter whether you were a rich kid in real life or a student scrounging up some coins each day, people in the game were the same. Not anymore. The guy next to you has a mount that looks better than yours? Buy one in the cash shop. You are gaining XP not quickly enough? Buy XP boosts. You keep dying in PvP? Buy equipment with stats.
Funny thing is, you're impression that things were more equal during the subscription era is entirely illusion.
There were people who multiboxed, so they would have significantly more farm / money than you. People still paid for accounts back then, and could buy a higher lvl than you if they had the money (and they were actually more expensive back then). Not to mention the obvious advantages given to players who could play for a longer time than you could. Or had a better raiding guild than you. People were not equal.
People are still not equal, and never will be. What's changed is there are now more games, and more people playing them. People aren't locked into one game like they used to, and now play multiple games. And people no longer have to caught up money up front just to find out if a game is good or not.
100% wrong. I dont have any F2P as my main MMO right now but I do enjoy being able to try them out and see what I like and dont like. This allows players to understand what it is they enjoy doing, what aspects turn them off and on. When you have to pay for content you feel forced to like it because you spent money on it, as you see with tons of people on here who have to bash or praise games because they have invested money on it and try and justify why they spend money on it. If a game is good it doesnt need so many people trying to defend it or bash other games to defend it.
If people want to pay or not pay for a game what does it matter to you? Who are you to take away what other people enjoy? Just because you are picky and have some kind of defect where you cant enjoy games unless you are paying for them, that isnt the fault of other players. If you truely want a game that ultimate game then get off your butt and go make it. Nothing is stopping you.
It is my belief that game developers and companies should die out or go away if they cannot make a good mmo. Rather than hang on and try to make that good game by suckering players into the ftp cash shop venue.
So, are you saying here that if a game goes F2P, it makes it bad? Not quite sure I can get behind that. It may certainly mean that the developers/publishers weren't making enough money as a purely pay to play model, but doesn't mean that the game itself was bad.
A cash shop doesn't make a game "good" nor do developers believe that putting in a F2P model & cash shop will make their game "good".
Let's say there is a REALLY bad MMO (as in completely broken, boring, buggy, etc.) and the company goes F2P and puts in a cash shop in order to make more money. That will not work unless the game gets fixed and becomes fun to play. People don't just buy from cash shops for no reason, especially in a game that they don't enjoying playing. They do so when they are enjoying the game.
Personally, I like having options. Games like Rift, Aion, SWTOR, TERA, etc. all have pretty decent options. You can play for free, with a bit of restrictions, or you can pay monthly, with no restrictions, and sometimes even get bonuses (like cash shop credit in SWTOR for example).
I believe that game developers should at least charge for a game. Make it not F2P. As well as make the game subscription based. You see, through the years I have watched mmo companies survive by makinga horrible or mediocre games f2p with cash shop options.
As long as we the player have f2p mmos. The chances of us ever seeing that ultimate mmo is very slim. It is my belief that game developers and companies should die out or go away if they cannot make a good mmo. Rather than hang on and try to make that good game by suckering players into the ftp cash shop venue. That way those developers which are truly talented can offer us the player a more substantive, outstanding, mmorpg to play. The point is simple. If you cannot make a good mmo now, what makes you think any of your derived conclusions to a new mmo to work towards will be any better?
Just as in the stock market. The mmo companies should follow the make or break ideology. Rather than the socialistic substandard gaming that many developers offer now. I know some companies do offer subs as well as f2p. I would offer let go of those and stick with the games people like.
I know some of you would disagree with me. (IMO)But until there is a change in the current industry the great mmo will never return!
What do you think needs to change in the mmo industry?
Disagree, while I personaly like subscription based MMORPG allot more. But for the majority of other players I like to have these options like F2P/B2P/P2P.
I do dislike exclusive cashshop items because to me as a gamer I want exclusive because I play and pay for their game (sub)
Somewhere along the line the the way of thinking about "what will players want to play" seems to have changed into "what are players willing to pay" (cashshop)
But that doesn't take away that I want those games to be there because there is a audience for it
There were people who multiboxed, so they would have significantly more farm / money than you. People still paid for accounts back then, and could buy a higher lvl than you if they had the money (and they were actually more expensive back then). Not to mention the obvious advantages given to players who could play for a longer time than you could. Or had a better raiding guild than you. People were not equal.
People are still not equal, and never will be. What's changed is there are now more games, and more people playing them. People aren't locked into one game like they used to, and now play multiple games. And people no longer have to caught up money up front just to find out if a game is good or not.
Account/gold buying and selling was against the TOS of all these games and would get you banned if you were caught. Multiboxing, not really all that different from getting a friend to play with you (except way less effective). Rewarding people for time spent in the game and good social skills (to find a and work in good guild) seems perfectly fair to me. I don't know when fairness came to mean "I should be able to log in for 2 minutes, never talk to anyone and still get everything." You used to be only able to do that through cheating but now you can just bribe the company in the cash shop and they'll let you ignore all the normal rules *sigh* Do you really not get why people think some of these cash shop games have lost integrity?
not sure how much money they make - for them i hope it's enough- but i like the model TSW has (or in non mmo examples, LoL).
-snip-
the prob with MOST f2p games is plain and simple: you spend money, you get "good". that's not how it should work, kinda kills the idea of gaming, at least for me.
It would be nice to know what the average overhead is to run an mmo.
No matter what game you play you are going to SPEND something to gain advantage over other players (competition motivation): money, time, or intelligence. There's no such thing as making a game where a player doesn't get spent. And there is no possible way to create an equal spending ground because everyone's income, schedule, or mental aptitudes are different. Equality in mmo's is just not possible.
For all my ability to use two dollar words I do poorly in games that require high intel or quick decisions (me button masher *argh grunt*). I have time but I don't want to grind. Money comes and goes. Here is my beef. I want to see mmorpg's relying on something new - creativity. I want mmo's with graphic art programs where players design our own pets, characters, clothing, armor, furniture, dungeons, music, space pods, etc.
Player creativity is the only thing mmorpg's lack and if we added that I would finally have an advantage over fellow players. Because make no mistake, there must be some type of competition or no one will bother to play.
Comments
Most actually have subscriptions. The only difference is some have optional subscriptions but those usually make up for it with a particularly obnoxious cash shop It's not really even a question of F2P vs sub anymore. It's a question of if the have a cash shop (most do) how bad is the cash shop and are you willing to pay a sub to avoid the really obnoxious aspects of the cash shop?
Personally I think games which both have a mandatory sub and a non-cosmetic only cash shop can fuck right off I rather a bad F2P model to that.
Disagree. In the grand scheme of gaming, MMO gaming has the fewest playerbase in the industry. I'll give you ONE reason why this is so:
If you said "the business model" then ding ding ding we have a winner!
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Why does this have to be in game perks? There surely has to be some other way to increase revenue. It is a fact that games (all games) benefit from limiting the disparity between players.
my top MMOs: UO,DAOC,WoW,GW2
most of my posts are just my opinions they are not facts,it is the same for you too.
I said nothing about in-game perks. Were you confused or was that just a horrible attempt at a strawman?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
The best example of a game that was funded by subscription only, with no micro-transactions is Lego Universe. Whatever was needed in the game was earned, traded, gifted from another player, or given through codes from Lego. Everyone had an equal ability to advance in the game. Unfortunately, it did not receive the publicity it needed to survive.
When Disney bought Club Penguin, they began to bring back rare items for sale. Once in a lifetime items. KingsIsle has done the same thing. in Wizard101 and Pirate101. Bringing back exclusive, rare, never to be seen again items, is the worst type of micro-transactions in Gaming.
I despise micro-transactions. I would support subscriptions to rid Gaming of what micro-transactiolns has done ... it's despicable.
I don't think they totally have to do away with free to play games, but I know where the poster is coming from. A vast majority of the f2p titles I have tried are just money grabs. A prime example of this is Neverwinter, they have one of the worst f2p I have every seen. Even worse than SWTOR was when it first went f2p, which is somewhat better now over time. Games like the one I stated have actually removed in game items to make them shop items only at this point. People tend to spend more money on f2p than p2p in most cases.
With that said I do find that I prefer p2p more because it usually stops a lot of the people that just make accounts over and over to harass people. Gold farmers being the only ones that will do it in a paying system most of the time because they have to buy new accounts when banned.
Something I wouldn't mind seeing is official forums being linked to the players true names or emails with no way to create accounts just to bad mouth games or harass people. They are doing this in China as we speak for social networks ect.... I don't think it is a bad thing. Would stop a lot of the incredible amount of bile a lot of people spew online.
I can agree with this somewhat. I wish game companies were forced to release information on exactly were subs revenue was spent, since it is a contract with the customer. If at least half didn't go into future development the game should be shut down. I could see half going for staffing/maintenance.
Future games have a lot less chance of sucking if they're P2P. Most current games aren't good enough to be P2P though so wouldn't recommend them switching over. Don't even want to think of what the greedier companies would do but I can guess a P2P system + invasion cash shop.
Cash shops make every game I've ever played worse, that's reason enough to do away with them. You can't really argue against it since even now the most successful MMO is P2P(WoW).
I don't not believe the payment model has any real tangible effect on quality of product. Not sure why socialism is always equated to f2p. I blame the current popular boogie man use of the word. Neither the government nor any other group owns a f2p MMO as far as I know. They appear to me to be highly capitalistic. The current MMO climate has boat loads of competition making it healthy capitalism. Will this always produce quality? Well, no companies will try and max profits because the investment isn't made to produce the ultimate MMO it's made to produce profit. What are you asking for some kind of self imposed regulation on the MMO payment model? Because you decided that is the only way an MMO can have success?
At the end of the day if you believe subscription == quality then only buy subscription games. You are correct in saying others will disagree, we can see that in the MMO market place.
Another year, another pointless tirade against specific business models.
Let's not forget that companies are in the business to make money. Their products need to earn money to stay viable and keep the company (and its investors) satisfied. Every business model since the inception of businesses has been to maximize the revenue and turn it into profit. For now, games have found a new, current sweet-spot of income production, micro-transactions. We are seeing the gaming industry go through the same transition as traditional periodical (magazines) and daily (newspaper) publishing; these industries couldn't generate the revenues with the subscription model, either.
Customers always have the option, pay or not. They have no leverage on business practices or policies. It's a like-it-or-lump-it situation, pay the price for the product or don't play. That's the limit of the players' options.
I don't mind how the companies produce games and fund themselves. What I care about is having a good game to play when I want to. If the product is good enough, and my desire to play is great enough, the pricing is within my means, then I may choose to participate in their economy and pay them money. If not, I simply look for another game, I don't try to change how Company X does business.
If they were charging you by getting to come over monthly and kick your dog/cat/parakeet/whatever, then there would be legitimate moral grounds to be offended.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
I just think that it's depressing that people are not equal in MMORPGs anymore, since subscription MMORPGs died out.
When there were still non-cash shop MMORPGs, people were equal. It didn't matter whether you were a rich kid in real life or a student scrounging up some coins each day, people in the game were the same. Not anymore. The guy next to you has a mount that looks better than yours? Buy one in the cash shop. You are gaining XP not quickly enough? Buy XP boosts. You keep dying in PvP? Buy equipment with stats.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
It was never equal though was it, if you had more time you could be more powerful. I would argue that because of that there has always been people looking for ways to even the playing field. Gold selling, exploiting, and hacks far pre-date F2P. Because they see the need and they could never stop it companies have come up with a way to make money off it now.So from a financial point of view companies need to make good decisions or else they are out of a job and maybe even in debt.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Well, as popular as subscriptions are (on this site), I hate to say but there is a metric ton of market data that shows subscriptions are not a good idea right now. All those 'crappy little f2p mmos' are actually making money, and many of them also cost a fraction to develop. Most of the subscription games? Less so.
If you want to change the mmo industry, you need to start with yourself (the player).
Most gamers (especially on this site) don't take responsibility for anything. They make demands of developers, criticize everything under the sun, and insist that they are smarter than everyone else (i know, a massive generalization here). However, very few of us challenge our own opinions. Very few of us reflect, to see how much of what we say has actually been right, and how many predictions / claims we've made have actually been wrong. Or what those mistakes would mean if they were to actually go into effect.
Furthermore, very few of us gamers take a long hard look at what we actually want from our games. What specifically we want. Not some nebulous wishlist that has no details, but just a bunch of ideologies. I'm talking about specifics. What mechanics we like, what other mechanics tend to work well with them. How important aesthetics (art design) is too our actual enjoyment of the game, and how much of that is superficial. How many games have we tried without forming assumptions & preconceptions before we even enter the loading screen.
These are things that not only help us become better consumers (by helping us identify things we don't like before we give them our money), but also helps us actually tell the developers what we really want. Because I can tell you, nothing is more frustrating than having to decipher what a bunch of idiots on the internet actually want. And yet developers have to do it every day. Most people are very bad at articulating what they want, and just expect others to reach into their brains and make it happen. Afaik, people don't actually have that ability yet.
- So, be smart. Be a better gamer. Go back and play older games. Figure out what you actually want, and start supporting the games & studios that are actually doing it. And if no one is doing it? If it means enough to you, start small / find some friends, make a simplified version as a game (proof of concept). You never know where it will lead you, and you'll actually see first hand what it's like to make a game.
This ^
It's like people have developed the assumption that they have the right to design other people's games for them. There are more good games out than we've ever had, and many of them get overlooked, or passed over for 'this years latest hotness'.
Play what you enjoy, and stop giving money to the rest.
Funny thing is, you're impression that things were more equal during the subscription era is entirely illusion.
There were people who multiboxed, so they would have significantly more farm / money than you. People still paid for accounts back then, and could buy a higher lvl than you if they had the money (and they were actually more expensive back then). Not to mention the obvious advantages given to players who could play for a longer time than you could. Or had a better raiding guild than you. People were not equal.
People are still not equal, and never will be. What's changed is there are now more games, and more people playing them. People aren't locked into one game like they used to, and now play multiple games. And people no longer have to caught up money up front just to find out if a game is good or not.
100% wrong. I dont have any F2P as my main MMO right now but I do enjoy being able to try them out and see what I like and dont like. This allows players to understand what it is they enjoy doing, what aspects turn them off and on. When you have to pay for content you feel forced to like it because you spent money on it, as you see with tons of people on here who have to bash or praise games because they have invested money on it and try and justify why they spend money on it. If a game is good it doesnt need so many people trying to defend it or bash other games to defend it.
If people want to pay or not pay for a game what does it matter to you? Who are you to take away what other people enjoy? Just because you are picky and have some kind of defect where you cant enjoy games unless you are paying for them, that isnt the fault of other players. If you truely want a game that ultimate game then get off your butt and go make it. Nothing is stopping you.
So, are you saying here that if a game goes F2P, it makes it bad? Not quite sure I can get behind that. It may certainly mean that the developers/publishers weren't making enough money as a purely pay to play model, but doesn't mean that the game itself was bad.
A cash shop doesn't make a game "good" nor do developers believe that putting in a F2P model & cash shop will make their game "good".
Let's say there is a REALLY bad MMO (as in completely broken, boring, buggy, etc.) and the company goes F2P and puts in a cash shop in order to make more money. That will not work unless the game gets fixed and becomes fun to play. People don't just buy from cash shops for no reason, especially in a game that they don't enjoying playing. They do so when they are enjoying the game.
Personally, I like having options. Games like Rift, Aion, SWTOR, TERA, etc. all have pretty decent options. You can play for free, with a bit of restrictions, or you can pay monthly, with no restrictions, and sometimes even get bonuses (like cash shop credit in SWTOR for example).
Disagree, while I personaly like subscription based MMORPG allot more. But for the majority of other players I like to have these options like F2P/B2P/P2P.
I do dislike exclusive cashshop items because to me as a gamer I want exclusive because I play and pay for their game (sub)
Somewhere along the line the the way of thinking about "what will players want to play" seems to have changed into "what are players willing to pay" (cashshop)
But that doesn't take away that I want those games to be there because there is a audience for it
Account/gold buying and selling was against the TOS of all these games and would get you banned if you were caught. Multiboxing, not really all that different from getting a friend to play with you (except way less effective). Rewarding people for time spent in the game and good social skills (to find a and work in good guild) seems perfectly fair to me. I don't know when fairness came to mean "I should be able to log in for 2 minutes, never talk to anyone and still get everything." You used to be only able to do that through cheating but now you can just bribe the company in the cash shop and they'll let you ignore all the normal rules *sigh* Do you really not get why people think some of these cash shop games have lost integrity?
It would be nice to know what the average overhead is to run an mmo.
No matter what game you play you are going to SPEND something to gain advantage over other players (competition motivation): money, time, or intelligence. There's no such thing as making a game where a player doesn't get spent. And there is no possible way to create an equal spending ground because everyone's income, schedule, or mental aptitudes are different. Equality in mmo's is just not possible.
For all my ability to use two dollar words I do poorly in games that require high intel or quick decisions (me button masher *argh grunt*). I have time but I don't want to grind. Money comes and goes. Here is my beef. I want to see mmorpg's relying on something new - creativity. I want mmo's with graphic art programs where players design our own pets, characters, clothing, armor, furniture, dungeons, music, space pods, etc.
Player creativity is the only thing mmorpg's lack and if we added that I would finally have an advantage over fellow players. Because make no mistake, there must be some type of competition or no one will bother to play.