Originally posted by VastoHorde Buy To Play is the worst model of them all. ESO needs to remain a sub game.
Tend to agree, though i could see the game using the SW;TOR method, a F2P/P2P hybrid, same one thats also used in Archeage.
One thing for sure though, if they do end up segregating the players by platform, it will be an unmitigated disaster with very unequal game play, it probably won't even be all that viable financially, it would not be wrong to say that FFXIV;ARR has done as well as it has, because it doesn't matter which platform you use, your on the same server as everyone else, so friends aren't separated by platform choices, and the community as a whole benefits from the inclusion, rather than exclusion that segregation engenders.
If the game does go away from P2P then Hybrid FTP/P2P would be my next choice. It also works very well in TERA.
And what about WoW? I don't play the game but I've always heard it has frequent content updates. IMO a sub does indeed give the developer a stable income to be able to bring such updates. Whether or not they choose to do that is up to them, but it is in fact more frequently seen in sub games vs. non-sub games.
WoW, the most popular P2P game did not have any updates for 14 months, prior to latest expansion.
At the same time, F2P games such as SWTOR, Neverwiner Online and STO are getting digital expansions every year. Path of Exile is getting content even more often.
GW2, B2P game gets Living Story updates every 2 weeks and Destiny, B2P game is getting it's second DLC 3 months after launch.
My point is, that, no, you don't see more frequent updates in P2P games, compared to games with F2P and B2P business model. On the contrary.
disingenuous, while actual expansions in WoW might be less frequent, you are totally ignoring game updates that include content throughout the year, and come at no extra charge. Never mind the shear volume of content the game already contains, at no extra charge.
Games like Destiny, which released DLC's that were very low in actual content, added very little to a game that was already embarassingly devoid of actual content, not a good argument for nickel and diming the players for shortcomings of the game itself, and GW2's living story has a certain amount of controversy attached, so less said about that the better. As for SW;TOR, its a F2P/P2P hybrid, and uses the same expansion methodology and for that matter, timing, as WoW, not sure how this supports your argument? STO no idea about, its kind of disappeared into obscurity, and Neverwinter online is clearly a cash grab, player added content, for a price is hardly a positive argument.
When it comes to added content and VFM, P2P games tend to provide more and better, Eve online regularly adds content, at no extra cost, to the games subscribers, if there is one thing that stands out though, is that when F2P games have added content, or DLC, it tends to be light on actual content, and relatively high in cost, Destiny is a classic example of this type.
Originally posted by Colt47 I'm not sure that taking the path of an over rated nostalgia trip and fan service game is the best idea for ESO, given the Elder Scrolls games have a much stronger pc following than console following. FFXIV ARR was bound to do well on consoles because of the demographic Square Enix targeted.
Sales aren't a measure of where the strongest fans are at. In fact, those stats actually match up pretty well with what is to be expected. =p
Final Fantasy has it's strongest fan base historically on the consoles simply by the fact the series originated in Japan, which has always had a stronger console following than PC. All I'm saying is don't expect bringing ESO to video game consoles to have the same kind of results as a game series with it's roots in the console market.
It probably would make more sense logically to only put it on PS4, but there's a lot you need to look at. ZOS already promised both consoles. It's hard to backtrack on such a big decision like that. Also, Bethesda/Zenimax have always had a pretty neutral stance with both companies, there's probably a huge tug-of-war going on behind the scenes.
But I do agree, I think Microsoft should drop the gold requirement. ZOS could make the argument that by not doing so they are hurting their game, and for that reason they could justify only selling it on PS4. I feel like at this point though it's too late.
Microsoft and Sony are both asshats. I feel sorry for anyone who must make business deals with them. Even so all major mmo's should be on a console. Until gaming computers bring their prices down.
Microsoft and Sony are both asshats. I feel sorry for anyone who must make business deals with them. Even so all major mmo's should be on a console. Until gaming computers bring their prices down.
Yeah would be awesome to nerf mmo games for PC users.
Comments
If the game does go away from P2P then Hybrid FTP/P2P would be my next choice. It also works very well in TERA.
disingenuous, while actual expansions in WoW might be less frequent, you are totally ignoring game updates that include content throughout the year, and come at no extra charge. Never mind the shear volume of content the game already contains, at no extra charge.
Games like Destiny, which released DLC's that were very low in actual content, added very little to a game that was already embarassingly devoid of actual content, not a good argument for nickel and diming the players for shortcomings of the game itself, and GW2's living story has a certain amount of controversy attached, so less said about that the better. As for SW;TOR, its a F2P/P2P hybrid, and uses the same expansion methodology and for that matter, timing, as WoW, not sure how this supports your argument? STO no idea about, its kind of disappeared into obscurity, and Neverwinter online is clearly a cash grab, player added content, for a price is hardly a positive argument.
When it comes to added content and VFM, P2P games tend to provide more and better, Eve online regularly adds content, at no extra cost, to the games subscribers, if there is one thing that stands out though, is that when F2P games have added content, or DLC, it tends to be light on actual content, and relatively high in cost, Destiny is a classic example of this type.
Sales aren't a measure of where the strongest fans are at. In fact, those stats actually match up pretty well with what is to be expected. =p
Final Fantasy has it's strongest fan base historically on the consoles simply by the fact the series originated in Japan, which has always had a stronger console following than PC. All I'm saying is don't expect bringing ESO to video game consoles to have the same kind of results as a game series with it's roots in the console market.
It probably would make more sense logically to only put it on PS4, but there's a lot you need to look at. ZOS already promised both consoles. It's hard to backtrack on such a big decision like that. Also, Bethesda/Zenimax have always had a pretty neutral stance with both companies, there's probably a huge tug-of-war going on behind the scenes.
But I do agree, I think Microsoft should drop the gold requirement. ZOS could make the argument that by not doing so they are hurting their game, and for that reason they could justify only selling it on PS4. I feel like at this point though it's too late.
Microsoft and Sony are both asshats. I feel sorry for anyone who must make business deals with them. Even so all major mmo's should be on a console. Until gaming computers bring their prices down.
Yeah would be awesome to nerf mmo games for PC users.