I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
What YOU cannot prove is that this "need" is due to being in financial trouble rather than a capitalistic company working within the capitalistic principles of "you always need to have more than before". SE worked this way in 2002, they work this way in 2015. Prove me wrong.
I DONT need to prove anything, YOU made a claim YOU have to prove it.
All i have to do is say "i dont believe you because you have no proof for what you saying".
And im kinda of guy who doesnt believe random posters....posts.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
What YOU cannot prove is that this "need" is due to being in financial trouble rather than a capitalistic company working within the capitalistic principles of "you always need to have more than before". SE worked this way in 2002, they work this way in 2015. Prove me wrong.
I DONT need to prove anything, YOU made a claim YOU have to prove it.
All i have to do is say "i dont believe you because you have no proof for what you saying".
And im kinda of guy who doesnt believe random posters....posts.
I'm sure you're the one claiming that FXIV ARR NEEDED a cash shop along with the subscription because they didn't have enough subscriptions to sustain without the cash shop.
So I would say, YOU made the claim, YOU prove it.
We would be the ones that would say "I don't believe you because you have no proof and we're the kind of guys that dont believe random poster's posts."
Your reponse is just laughable. LMAO. Unless you can't even understand your own posts, by god, it's even more laughable.
I don't think it's possible for all games to justify a mandatory subscription.
My thoughts:
If mandatory sub and NO item shop... If item shop would earn more money than subscriptions, it doesn't make sense.
If mandatory sub and WITH item shop... If sub keeps people from playing, then sub hurts item shop monetization.
Best working solution appears to be OPTIONAL subscription.
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
The inability to stay profitable under a subscription is the result of casual game design and choosing to emulate rather than innovate. When games were unique, this was not an issue.
This is at the heart of the issue.
Themeparks cannot stay profitable as subs. Especially WoW clone ones.
That's assuming the "pre-casual" era was profitable. People saw MMO's as too time-consuming, so they avoided them like the plague.
Except, you know, the millions of players that were playing them before WoW, raising huge companies out of small developers...
And no, there has been almost zero innovation in 10 years. And what's more important, the games, at their heart, are designed to quickly burn through linear content and quit.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
Originally posted by Ghavrigg I will always prefer a P2P or B2P over F2P. Still, F2P games are generally low quality overall and are F2P for a reason. No one would play them otherwise.
I don't think I've ever read something so short and so wrong at the same time.
Monetization and quality have nothing to do with each other.
And yet, still somehow works out as I said regardless. But this is just my personal opinion. I've never played an F2P game that wasn't F2P for a reason. AAA quality doesn't come free.
There are many AAA MMO's that used to be P2P though. They went F2P, because people didn't deem their gameplay design, worthy of a subscription.
They went F2P because the people in control of the money supply were not happy with the returns they were getting. You can deny it but it is all about what the people with the money want and don't want. Many people deemed these games' gameplay design worthy of subscription. However not enough people deemed the design worthy for the investor to be satisfied on the ROI. And what is enough depends entirely on the expectations of the investors:
FFXIV doesn't have more subs than any AAA P2P-gone-F2P-MMO. In fact some other MMOs have had more subs eve. Yet it keeps trucking as a P2P MMO because the financing parties are happy with it's progress. Clearly there is enough people that deem the design worthy of subscription for the company to continue providing similar service.
Most investors want a fast return on their investments, being greedy. This is why games go F2P. Not because people don't consider them "worthy". Most P2P-gone-F2P games could have found great success in being P2P. But they'd get less money in the short-term. So they switched to F2P.
It is extremely simple.
That's a nice spin on things.
You're trying to blame the investors for being greedy. It couldn't be because they were losing money, or pulling out to protect their interests.
You're also trying to portray FFXIV financiers as being charitable and noble. They'll start pulling the plug once subs drop below the threshold, when it can no longer support costs and future development, and then they'll be faced with shutting down or switching to a different revenue model.
Subscription numbers are directly correlated with bad game design. The majority didn't enjoy their MMO, so they didn't deem it worthy of $15 a month. FFXIV 1.0 is a prime example.
FFXIV is only benefiting because of the lack of competition for a subscription MMO. Their only major competitor is WoW, a 10 year old game.
The inability to stay profitable under a subscription is the result of casual game design and choosing to emulate rather than innovate. When games were unique, this was not an issue.
This is at the heart of the issue.
Themeparks cannot stay profitable as subs. Especially WoW clone ones.
That's assuming the "pre-casual" era was profitable. People saw MMO's as too time-consuming, so they avoided them like the plague.
Except, you know, the millions of players that were playing them before WoW, raising huge companies out of small developers...
And no, there has been almost zero innovation in 10 years. And what's more important, the games, at their heart, are designed to quickly burn through linear content and quit.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
Originally posted by Cyrael The only three games that I feel release enough contents and updates to merit a description are Final Fantasy XIV, Eve Online, and Guild Wars 2. Everyone else, not even close.
Agreed. Wow until a couple of years ago as well but not anymore.
The thing is that regular updates is far more important than releasing a huge game at launch, I rather play a game that start out small but grow pretty fast with time than a huge game that rarely adds any new content.
The real problem for subscription games in my case is that I have zero tolerance for RMT in a games with monthly fees. And most games who still is P2P tend sell stuff as well and then I might as well play GW2 who do sell stuff but doesn't have any fees.
Don't get me wrong, I like P2P and I am willing to fork in money for the game and even a payed expansion now and then but I pay to avoid microtransactions so the stuff you have actually is earned in the game.
The inability to stay profitable under a subscription is the result of casual game design and choosing to emulate rather than innovate. When games were unique, this was not an issue.
This is at the heart of the issue.
Themeparks cannot stay profitable as subs. Especially WoW clone ones.
That's assuming the "pre-casual" era was profitable. People saw MMO's as too time-consuming, so they avoided them like the plague.
Except, you know, the millions of players that were playing them before WoW, raising huge companies out of small developers...
And no, there has been almost zero innovation in 10 years. And what's more important, the games, at their heart, are designed to quickly burn through linear content and quit.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
The inability to stay profitable under a subscription is the result of casual game design and choosing to emulate rather than innovate. When games were unique, this was not an issue.
This is at the heart of the issue.
Themeparks cannot stay profitable as subs. Especially WoW clone ones.
That's assuming the "pre-casual" era was profitable. People saw MMO's as too time-consuming, so they avoided them like the plague.
Except, you know, the millions of players that were playing them before WoW, raising huge companies out of small developers...
And no, there has been almost zero innovation in 10 years. And what's more important, the games, at their heart, are designed to quickly burn through linear content and quit.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
verb (used without object), innovated, innovating.
1.
to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
Ah, so your argument makes sense when you go with the asinine "literally everything is an innovation" method.
As opposed to your argument that there has been zero innovation in 10 years?
I never claimed everything was innovated.
In fact, i even stated: "Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new", which corresponds to the first part of the definition, "to introduce something new".
I provided a list of features that have been improved on, and you haven't provided anything to counter it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
The inability to stay profitable under a subscription is the result of casual game design and choosing to emulate rather than innovate. When games were unique, this was not an issue.
This is at the heart of the issue.
Themeparks cannot stay profitable as subs. Especially WoW clone ones.
That's assuming the "pre-casual" era was profitable. People saw MMO's as too time-consuming, so they avoided them like the plague.
Except, you know, the millions of players that were playing them before WoW, raising huge companies out of small developers...
And no, there has been almost zero innovation in 10 years. And what's more important, the games, at their heart, are designed to quickly burn through linear content and quit.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
verb (used without object), innovated, innovating.
1.
to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
Ah, so your argument makes sense when you go with the asinine "literally everything is an innovation" method.
As opposed to your argument that there has been zero innovation in 10 years?
I never claimed everything was innovated.
In fact, i even stated: "Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new", which corresponds to the first part of the definition, "to introduce something new".
I provided a list of features that have been improved on, and you haven't provided anything to counter it.
Except most of those features are entirely unchanged from how they've been since they came onto the scene 15-20 years ago. Many of them were in even better states in the past and have regressed.
You gave a bulleted list of "innovations" and yet only listed one actual innovation.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
What YOU cannot prove is that this "need" is due to being in financial trouble rather than a capitalistic company working within the capitalistic principles of "you always need to have more than before". SE worked this way in 2002, they work this way in 2015. Prove me wrong.
I DONT need to prove anything, YOU made a claim YOU have to prove it.
All i have to do is say "i dont believe you because you have no proof for what you saying".
And im kinda of guy who doesnt believe random posters....posts.
You have made that claim on multiple threads. You are the one who should prove it, or you should just stop making baseless claims.
James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
What YOU cannot prove is that this "need" is due to being in financial trouble rather than a capitalistic company working within the capitalistic principles of "you always need to have more than before". SE worked this way in 2002, they work this way in 2015. Prove me wrong.
I DONT need to prove anything, YOU made a claim YOU have to prove it.
All i have to do is say "i dont believe you because you have no proof for what you saying".
And im kinda of guy who doesnt believe random posters....posts.
You have made that claim on multiple threads. You are the one who should prove it, or you should just stop making baseless claims.
Well, you will agree that making baseless claims is nonsensical. But that doesnt stop myriad of posts proclaiming FFXIV as vanguard of P2P...based on nothing. In fact, SQIXes own statements point the other way.
So yeah, next time you want to proclaim anything about XIV back it up with official numbers.
You can't be serious. There has been a lot of innovation.
Combat - Is about the same as it's been for a while. There's a bit more "action" combat now, but that has existed in MMOs since the very first one with M59, and with AC1, and RYL, and CoH, and many others.
Constructing/Building - Same as it has always been. Less so, in many areas, compared to SWG and UO.
Phasing - Is just a slightly different application of instancing, which many don't see as a positive thing, but that's neither here nor there.
Vehicles - Have existed in almost every MMO since about 2002.
Siege weaponry - This one goes back to 2000 and 2001. Try again.
Housing - Most MMOs since the dawn of the genre have had housing.
Traveling ....what?
Crafting (Archeage and Black Desert crop farming) - Crop farming, not new, but slightly underused. Crafting however, has been in from the start.
Story formats What?
Event systems (warhammer/gw2/rift/etc) This one I will give you, even though it's just an expanded version of what AC1 had.
and yes, even Questing has evolved. I'd say devolved, if anything. Less involved and complicated than they used to be. But there IS more scripting, I guess?
etc.
This is just off the top of my head, and there's many other features that are new to MMO's. Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new, but they have either evolved or been improved upon.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
verb (used without object), innovated, innovating.
1.
to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
Ah, so your argument makes sense when you go with the asinine "literally everything is an innovation" method.
As opposed to your argument that there has been zero innovation in 10 years?
I never claimed everything was innovated.
In fact, i even stated: "Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new", which corresponds to the first part of the definition, "to introduce something new".
I provided a list of features that have been improved on, and you haven't provided anything to counter it.
Except most of those features are entirely unchanged from how they've been since they came onto the scene 15-20 years ago. Many of them were in even better states in the past and have regressed.
You gave a bulleted list of "innovations" and yet only listed one actual innovation.
ANd I said ALMOST none.
How can you really believe that?
Read the definition again... "changes in anything established"
I can't help you if you refuse to believe there hasn't been any significant changes in the last 15-20 years in the genre. That's being delusional, sorry. I'll let you have the last word though. There's no point in trying to convince you, even though i provided a list of features that have innovated and evolved.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
I didnt move anything. Services had cost before because it wasnt automated process. Today, yes, its pure greed to charge for such service. You can see the pattern.
Bottom line is they NEEDED cash shop because sub is not enough because not enoiugh people play. You can spin it any way you want, but they never did it with FFXI.
They became greedier because whole company was in financial troube.
You can tout how "P2P has merit"....if theres cash shop, so every player is expected to spend more than sub to keep game going. FFXIV certainly isnt the case you want to put up as some kind of proof because it has RMT along mandatory sub.
The bottom line is that having or not having a cash shop doesn't change their sub numbers in any shape or form. Thus, when presented with these two options, any competent business would opt to include the cash shop, regardless of their "need" for it. That is because there is always a "need" to make more money than you are making now. That was true in 2002, it is even more true in 2015.
That you even mentioned this "need" argument shows how uninformed you truly are. Are you going to turn down 5000 dollars just because you didn't have a "need" for it at the time? You sure as hell will not. Assuming that companies operate on some different dimension in this regard is laughable. A company can get more money without any repercussions; the company will take advantage. It is the soul of capitalism that you always try to get more money than before. There is no "enough". There is no situation when you don't "need" more money.
You also seem to think companies aren't trying to squeeze the most profits out of their activities at all times without exceptions. In what universe do you live in, really?
And thats where what you claim falls apart because you can in NO WAY claim they dont need cash shop.
Once you back up your claims with some solid official financial data, FFXIV cannot be used as shining example of success of P2P.
Of major MMOs there are only 2: WoW and EvE and there are some minor MMOs.
Other than that....nope.
How about you back up that claim that they NEED a cash shop? You can in NO WAY claim that they NEED a cash shop.
WOW has a cash shop, would you say they NEEDED that just because it's there?
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
Wow. Sorry, making a game good is not about innovation, and never had been. Maybe someone should make a improved and more innovative card deck with 68 cards. Would it be an improvement. I don't think so. What makes a game good is recognizing what was good in the past and finding ways to improve on it, that's why I think Pantheon has the right idea, go back to the core nature of Muds and EQ for the feel but bring in more modern mechanics.
I would say that in this day and age that no game should have a subscription required. There is far too much competition in the online gaming world to really warrant nearly any new game being wildly successful with a sub fee requirement. Games like WoW and FF have been able to keep their sub fees intact mostly due to the loyal fanbases of those franchises.
The biggest problem we face as mmo fans is that games without subs or optional subs tend to gate their content to the point where you have to have a sub in order to move forward in the game. GW2 did a pretty good job of their B2P model, but even then there are some failings to that system as well.
I feel that the next round of indie developers are going to get things right for the most part.
Comments
Last known finacial report of SE's that I've seen has shown they are just now getting out of debt thanks to FFXIV's success. FFXIV uses it's money for regular content updates. The cash shop is said to buy EU servers means they are using extra money to buy hardware.
FFXIV's money goes to more than FFXIV - it goes into other SE projects because that's how business works. They worked on a budget. The budget is noticeably getting bigger when you see all they're putting into the expansion as well as the higher quality and size of their recent patches. Patch 2.5 - which includes 2.51 and 2.55 - is huge with lots of art assests, a new zone, and lots of voice acting. 2.4 added a class - which changed Limsa Lominsa - and the chapel area. 2.3 and 2.4's (especally 2.4's) primal's arenas are also of noticeably higher art quality.
Patches have also been steadil getting more animated in movement within a cutscene. 2.0 is noticeably a lot more stiff.
These things don't just come from programmers getting more comfortable with their software - money has to go in to making it.
Link those financial reports.
I DONT need to prove anything, YOU made a claim YOU have to prove it.
All i have to do is say "i dont believe you because you have no proof for what you saying".
And im kinda of guy who doesnt believe random posters....posts.
I'm sure you're the one claiming that FXIV ARR NEEDED a cash shop along with the subscription because they didn't have enough subscriptions to sustain without the cash shop.
So I would say, YOU made the claim, YOU prove it.
We would be the ones that would say "I don't believe you because you have no proof and we're the kind of guys that dont believe random poster's posts."
Your reponse is just laughable. LMAO. Unless you can't even understand your own posts, by god, it's even more laughable.
I don't think it's possible for all games to justify a mandatory subscription.
My thoughts:
If mandatory sub and NO item shop... If item shop would earn more money than subscriptions, it doesn't make sense.
If mandatory sub and WITH item shop... If sub keeps people from playing, then sub hurts item shop monetization.
Best working solution appears to be OPTIONAL subscription.
You contradict yourself almost immediately. No, most of these are not innovations of the last 10 years.
That's a nice spin on things.
You're trying to blame the investors for being greedy. It couldn't be because they were losing money, or pulling out to protect their interests.
You're also trying to portray FFXIV financiers as being charitable and noble. They'll start pulling the plug once subs drop below the threshold, when it can no longer support costs and future development, and then they'll be faced with shutting down or switching to a different revenue model.
Subscription numbers are directly correlated with bad game design. The majority didn't enjoy their MMO, so they didn't deem it worthy of $15 a month. FFXIV 1.0 is a prime example.
FFXIV is only benefiting because of the lack of competition for a subscription MMO. Their only major competitor is WoW, a 10 year old game.
It's not contradicting at all.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/innovate
1.
Agreed. Wow until a couple of years ago as well but not anymore.
The thing is that regular updates is far more important than releasing a huge game at launch, I rather play a game that start out small but grow pretty fast with time than a huge game that rarely adds any new content.
The real problem for subscription games in my case is that I have zero tolerance for RMT in a games with monthly fees. And most games who still is P2P tend sell stuff as well and then I might as well play GW2 who do sell stuff but doesn't have any fees.
Don't get me wrong, I like P2P and I am willing to fork in money for the game and even a payed expansion now and then but I pay to avoid microtransactions so the stuff you have actually is earned in the game.
Ah, so your argument makes sense when you go with the asinine "literally everything is an innovation" method.
As opposed to your argument that there has been zero innovation in 10 years?
I never claimed everything was innovated.
In fact, i even stated: "Granted, not all of them are innovated as something new", which corresponds to the first part of the definition, "to introduce something new".
I provided a list of features that have been improved on, and you haven't provided anything to counter it.
http://www.hd.square-enix.com/eng/ir/library/financial.html
Except most of those features are entirely unchanged from how they've been since they came onto the scene 15-20 years ago. Many of them were in even better states in the past and have regressed.
You gave a bulleted list of "innovations" and yet only listed one actual innovation.
ANd I said ALMOST none.
You have made that claim on multiple threads. You are the one who should prove it, or you should just stop making baseless claims.
James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?
And now point to where they mention what you claim they mention.
Since i know they said nothing of a sort, not a peep.
Thats why i wanted you to link THOSE financial reports.
Link where they said what you claim. Oh wait, you can't because it doesn't exist.
James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?
Well, you will agree that making baseless claims is nonsensical. But that doesnt stop myriad of posts proclaiming FFXIV as vanguard of P2P...based on nothing. In fact, SQIXes own statements point the other way.
So yeah, next time you want to proclaim anything about XIV back it up with official numbers.
How can you really believe that?
Read the definition again... "changes in anything established"
I can't help you if you refuse to believe there hasn't been any significant changes in the last 15-20 years in the genre. That's being delusional, sorry. I'll let you have the last word though. There's no point in trying to convince you, even though i provided a list of features that have innovated and evolved.
THIS is what I "claim"
something you would notice if you werent ranting all the time.
Move the goal posts. You are good at that.
James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?
No. Not one. Not even a little bit.
All of my posts are either intelligent, thought provoking, funny, satirical, sarcastic or intentionally disrespectful. Take your pick.
I get banned in the forums for games I love, so lets see if I do better in the forums for games I hate.
I enjoy the serenity of not caring what your opinion is.
I don't hate much, but I hate Apple© with a passion. If Steve Jobs was alive, I would punch him in the face.
If you ever paid twelve dollars an *hour* for gaming, that fifteen bucks a month still feels like a bargain.
I can understand the younger kids not seeing it as such.
Different eras entirely.
I would say that in this day and age that no game should have a subscription required. There is far too much competition in the online gaming world to really warrant nearly any new game being wildly successful with a sub fee requirement. Games like WoW and FF have been able to keep their sub fees intact mostly due to the loyal fanbases of those franchises.
The biggest problem we face as mmo fans is that games without subs or optional subs tend to gate their content to the point where you have to have a sub in order to move forward in the game. GW2 did a pretty good job of their B2P model, but even then there are some failings to that system as well.
I feel that the next round of indie developers are going to get things right for the most part.
It's a bit entitled isn't it?
You want a great game to play with other people and you are willing to pay for that.
But you aren't willing to pay a low monthly fee for the ability to play with everyone.
How many servers does it take to run a WoW? How many techs? Customer service people?