So, yes. It's not cheap. But something really special never is. And I'd think the majority of talent for a project like this would be no more expensive than the majority of talent in a typical hotel, where most of the staff is found in the kitchens, cleaning the rooms and working the desk and door.
nah ...
Daredevil on Netflix is pretty special.
House of Cards is pretty special.
Game of Throne is pretty special.
Portal 2 is pretty special.
... long list of "special" entertainment.
They are all CHEAP to the consumer. Why? Because they use modern technology. Producing one copy is expensive. Delivering to millions of consumers make it cheap (to consumers). Economy of scale.
Except that watching television is just a time waster while gaming
Well, clearly you are an entertainment consumer, but not really what I classify as a "gamer"
Take me for instance, I can't actually remember watching a single television show in the past 10 years when I didn't have my laptop on and was gaming at the same time. (The TV is really there to entertain my wife and for background noise or "downtime"
Haha please a "gamer" is not a person who hasn't put down a video game in 10 years. Now I could give a few other names you could call a person who has done nothing but play video games for ten years and a "gamer " isn't one.
Since Free is not in fact actually 'free' it really becomes a question of which provides a fun experience for the least amount of expenditure, to date, the only games that i have found that 'win' in this category, are MMO's that are either solely P2P, or have a P2P option that allows you to bypass the F2P restrictions, MMO's that do not have a P2P option, very rarely meet my minimum conditions of acceptable playing experience, without incurring a particularly heavy wallet lightening one. Or to put it another way, F2P games are seldom able to compete in the 'battle' for my time and money, because they don't represent good value for money.
So, yes. It's not cheap. But something really special never is. And I'd think the majority of talent for a project like this would be no more expensive than the majority of talent in a typical hotel, where most of the staff is found in the kitchens, cleaning the rooms and working the desk and door.
nah ...
Daredevil on Netflix is pretty special.
House of Cards is pretty special.
Game of Throne is pretty special.
Portal 2 is pretty special.
... long list of "special" entertainment.
They are all CHEAP to the consumer. Why? Because they use modern technology. Producing one copy is expensive. Delivering to millions of consumers make it cheap (to consumers). Economy of scale.
Except that watching television is just a time waster while gaming
Well, clearly you are an entertainment consumer, but not really what I classify as a "gamer"
Take me for instance, I can't actually remember watching a single television show in the past 10 years when I didn't have my laptop on and was gaming at the same time. (The TV is really there to entertain my wife and for background noise or "downtime"
Haha please a "gamer" is not a person who hasn't put down a video game in 10 years. Now I could give a few other names you could call a person who has done nothing but play video games for ten years and a "gamer " isn't one.
Dedicated? Hardcore? Fanatical?
Don't assume I don't do anything but game, but what I don't do is spend my time watching something when I can be gaming, perhaps because I have always had limited free time to devote to this hobby.
Probably wouldn't surprise you to know I only play MMORPGs, and only one at a time. (a purist, not a tourist to the genre)
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
So, yes. It's not cheap. But something really special never is. And I'd think the majority of talent for a project like this would be no more expensive than the majority of talent in a typical hotel, where most of the staff is found in the kitchens, cleaning the rooms and working the desk and door.
nah ...
Daredevil on Netflix is pretty special.
House of Cards is pretty special.
Game of Throne is pretty special.
Portal 2 is pretty special.
... long list of "special" entertainment.
They are all CHEAP to the consumer. Why? Because they use modern technology. Producing one copy is expensive. Delivering to millions of consumers make it cheap (to consumers). Economy of scale.
Except that watching television is just a time waster while gaming
Well, clearly you are an entertainment consumer, but not really what I classify as a "gamer"
Take me for instance, I can't actually remember watching a single television show in the past 10 years when I didn't have my laptop on and was gaming at the same time. (The TV is really there to entertain my wife and for background noise or "downtime"
Haha please a "gamer" is not a person who hasn't put down a video game in 10 years. Now I could give a few other names you could call a person who has done nothing but play video games for ten years and a "gamer " isn't one.
Dedicated? Hardcore? Fanatical?
Don't assume I don't do anything but game, but what I don't do is spend my time watching something when I can be gaming, perhaps because I have always had limited free time to devote to this hobby.
Probably wouldn't surprise you to know I only play MMORPGs, and only one at a time. (a purist, not a tourist to the genre)
Just pointing out a "gamer" can also wear other hats when it comes to entertainment.
Playing one mmorpg at a time is fine...I do the same but can also play games like The Crew, The Witcher, and Destiny in between.
I also enjoy a few select TV shows with the wife. Watching and going to baseball, Football, hockey games with friends and the family. I also enjoy concerts.
With all of that said I to am a "gamer". Maybe not by your definition but I don't recall you making definitions either so I'm good.
So, yes. It's not cheap. But something really special never is. And I'd think the majority of talent for a project like this would be no more expensive than the majority of talent in a typical hotel, where most of the staff is found in the kitchens, cleaning the rooms and working the desk and door.
nah ...
Daredevil on Netflix is pretty special.
House of Cards is pretty special.
Game of Throne is pretty special.
Portal 2 is pretty special.
... long list of "special" entertainment.
They are all CHEAP to the consumer. Why? Because they use modern technology. Producing one copy is expensive. Delivering to millions of consumers make it cheap (to consumers). Economy of scale.
Except that watching television is just a time waster while gaming
Well, clearly you are an entertainment consumer, but not really what I classify as a "gamer"
Take me for instance, I can't actually remember watching a single television show in the past 10 years when I didn't have my laptop on and was gaming at the same time. (The TV is really there to entertain my wife and for background noise or "downtime"
It is just a matter of definition. But I will freely admit that playing video games is just ONE hobby I engage in, and MMOs even a smaller part.
BTW, i consider discussing on THIS forum a DIFFERENT entertainment activity than playing video games .. and it is a lot more convenient (for example, i can post if i have 2 min in my office).
So absolutely please consider me not a "gamer", who have, in the past, play a lot of video games, and still play some. And from my perspective, some recent TV shows (and certainly movies) are much better entertainment than most games, and we have not even touched novels, wine, or restaurant hopping (note restaurant hopping cost a LOT more than game hopping).
Easy, you make a game worth paying a subscription for. Most free games aren't worth a sub for or didn't succeed with sub model therefore they are free. Most MMO's now just aren't worth the money. It's not about creating worlds and living in them with freedom to create outcomes, it's pay to have this new costume etc etc. Things certainly have gone downhill.
True, but in all honesty the genre has been dying since 2005. Only now I guess more people are starting to realize this?
Not if you consider the broadened MMO genre that includes instanced games like World of Tanks, and MOBAs.
I don't consider those MMO's. What is an MMO?
and i consider them MMOs, just because it is common usage.
Whether you consider them MMO is not really relevant to me, or the MMO gaming websites, or the industry analytics firms. Heck, not even this website.
The problem is that a noun needs to have at least a somewhat solid definition. Call of Duty fits MMO as well as any of the non-MMO stated as MMO but is defined as FPS. There is a clear difference between a MMOFPS with a persistent world like Planetside 2 and Call of Duty that is a traditional matched/single player story FPS. If any multiplayer game can be randomly called an MMO and other equivalents not... the word MMO is meaningless.
Its like saying a pear is an apple because their similar. You go to the story to buy apples and given a pear. Are you going to say its irrelevant because websites and money people label it as apples? Then all citrus fruit suddenly become oranges except limes, of course. The concept is just weird to me.
Since I opened this thread it's gained so much attention and discussion that I didn't even had a chance to further contribute to it. One thing is certain though, this kind of response just further shows how monetizing models, pricing/costs are very important to many, something producers should stronly be paying attention to.
If it is less than $10 a month it is well within most people's budget and people who like to play will subscribe.
Just look at Netflix and such, they make good money regardless of movie/TV show piracy.
Pricing has to be convenient and accessible. Most old American corporations seems to have trouble grasping that for some reason - they prefer high price and use the money earn from their exclusive clientele to sue people.
Since I opened this thread it's gained so much attention and discussion that I didn't even had a chance to further contribute to it. One thing is certain though, this kind of response just further shows how monetizing models, pricing/costs are very important to many, something producers should stronly be paying attention to.
Haha don't jump the gun there buddy...it's less than ten people continuing to post...most the time not even on the topic. Nice try though
Just look at Netflix and such, they make good money regardless of movie/TV show piracy.
There is a different ... Netflix is a catch all service .. i sub to it because there are tons of shows.
No single one game will be worth a sub ... at least to me. If STEAM has a sub (all you can play for $10 .. and every game in their library), i certainly will be interested.
Since I opened this thread it's gained so much attention and discussion that I didn't even had a chance to further contribute to it. One thing is certain though, this kind of response just further shows how monetizing models, pricing/costs are very important to many, something producers should stronly be paying attention to.
Developers have paid attention. Why do you think so many have gone F2P? Why do you assume you've paid closer attention to the industry than those of us whose livelihood depends on it?
Developers know a vocal minority will be upset by the change (a vocal minority is upset at any change; a vocal minority is upset if nothing happens!)
The only sort of speaking that matters to developers is whether players are buying the games. With that in mind:
Players shouldn't speak about innocuous purchases like cosmetics, conveniences, time-savers, and content. These are all things that it's generally agreed don't ruin a game. Some exceptions exist, but not many (for example if your game is Barbie Fashion Contest 2015, then selling cosmetics is actually P2W.)
Players should speak out about true P2W. If a purchase causes a game's challenges to require less skill, then that's true P2W. Most consider this to work against the main point of games.
Players should speak out about bad game design. This includes excessive timesinks that might be implemented with the intent to sell time-savers.
And again, all of this "speaking" needs to happen through your wallets.
The main strength of F2P is players speak with total clarity. You will never pay money to a F2P game you dislike, because you've played 80% of the game for free before money changed hands. Conversely, you can much more easily accidentally spend money on a B2P game you dislike (Minecraft doesn't know or care that I disliked it; they have my money, so from their point of view I was one more player speaking in favor of it.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The main strength of F2P is players speak with total clarity. You will never pay money to a F2P game you dislike, because you've played 80% of the game for free before money changed hands. Conversely, you can much more easily accidentally spend money on a B2P game you dislike (Minecraft doesn't know or care that I disliked it; they have my money, so from their point of view I was one more player speaking in favor of it.)
I'd like to note this is a very subjective stance. For one, there are pretty clear means to exploiting customers and driving them into emotional investments that have nothing to do with them actually liking a title. Many such purchases can and do happen within a one week window, which also falls in line with statistics that tend to note the 80% dropoff that happens in most titles. This is all lost investment for those players that puts the same effect as if it were B2P.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
"Free" is not good enough to compete with anything. Only Greedy companies benefit of "Free" games by abusing the poor(rich) braindead whales.
You forgot the majority non-whales who are enjoying free fun games?
You mean "leeches." No can't forget them.
Same difference ... just a different name. So while greedy companies exploits whales, greedy players exploits company. Seems like a great balance of karma to me.
The main strength of F2P is players speak with total clarity. You will never pay money to a F2P game you dislike, because you've played 80% of the game for free before money changed hands. Conversely, you can much more easily accidentally spend money on a B2P game you dislike (Minecraft doesn't know or care that I disliked it; they have my money, so from their point of view I was one more player speaking in favor of it.)
I'd like to note this is a very subjective stance. For one, there are pretty clear means to exploiting customers and driving them into emotional investments that have nothing to do with them actually liking a title. Many such purchases can and do happen within a one week window, which also falls in line with statistics that tend to note the 80% dropoff that happens in most titles. This is all lost investment for those players that puts the same effect as if it were B2P.
and yet most f2p players leeches and as you said .. 80% left soon. Sure .. the whales are exploited .. may be one week, may be longer.
But most players are not whales .. so whatever you said only applies to a small minority of players.
Plus ... even for a whale .. how many free games would he play before he got snatched up?
And .. do you have a cite for the ONE WEEK WINDOW comment? I don't quite believe it.
Just look at Netflix and such, they make good money regardless of movie/TV show piracy.
There is a different ... Netflix is a catch all service .. i sub to it because there are tons of shows.
No single one game will be worth a sub ... at least to me. If STEAM has a sub (all you can play for $10 .. and every game in their library), i certainly will be interested.
But a SINGLE GAME? not likely .. not for me.
Depending on the quality of the single game imo. I mean sometimes when you play mmo you don't even have the time to play other games anyways... unless you do nothing else BESIDES playing games that is :P
Comments
Or to put it another way, F2P games are seldom able to compete in the 'battle' for my time and money, because they don't represent good value for money.
Don't assume I don't do anything but game, but what I don't do is spend my time watching something when I can be gaming, perhaps because I have always had limited free time to devote to this hobby.
Probably wouldn't surprise you to know I only play MMORPGs, and only one at a time. (a purist, not a tourist to the genre)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Playing one mmorpg at a time is fine...I do the same but can also play games like The Crew, The Witcher, and Destiny in between.
I also enjoy a few select TV shows with the wife. Watching and going to baseball, Football, hockey games with friends and the family. I also enjoy concerts.
With all of that said I to am a "gamer". Maybe not by your definition but I don't recall you making definitions either so I'm good.
Tailored Boss suit:
Answer Be excellent.
Whether you consider them MMO is not really relevant to me, or the MMO gaming websites, or the industry analytics firms. Heck, not even this website.
It is just a matter of definition. But I will freely admit that playing video games is just ONE hobby I engage in, and MMOs even a smaller part.
BTW, i consider discussing on THIS forum a DIFFERENT entertainment activity than playing video games .. and it is a lot more convenient (for example, i can post if i have 2 min in my office).
So absolutely please consider me not a "gamer", who have, in the past, play a lot of video games, and still play some. And from my perspective, some recent TV shows (and certainly movies) are much better entertainment than most games, and we have not even touched novels, wine, or restaurant hopping (note restaurant hopping cost a LOT more than game hopping).
we need game that need skills, not just time consuming.
like dota 2. not like hearthstone where the veteren player win because they have better cards.
The problem is that a noun needs to have at least a somewhat solid definition. Call of Duty fits MMO as well as any of the non-MMO stated as MMO but is defined as FPS. There is a clear difference between a MMOFPS with a persistent world like Planetside 2 and Call of Duty that is a traditional matched/single player story FPS. If any multiplayer game can be randomly called an MMO and other equivalents not... the word MMO is meaningless.
Its like saying a pear is an apple because their similar. You go to the story to buy apples and given a pear. Are you going to say its irrelevant because websites and money people label it as apples? Then all citrus fruit suddenly become oranges except limes, of course. The concept is just weird to me.
Since I opened this thread it's gained so much attention and discussion that I didn't even had a chance to further contribute to it. One thing is certain though, this kind of response just further shows how monetizing models, pricing/costs are very important to many, something producers should stronly be paying attention to.
If it is less than $10 a month it is well within most people's budget and people who like to play will subscribe.
Just look at Netflix and such, they make good money regardless of movie/TV show piracy.
Pricing has to be convenient and accessible. Most old American corporations seems to have trouble grasping that for some reason - they prefer high price and use the money earn from their exclusive clientele to sue people.
There is a different ... Netflix is a catch all service .. i sub to it because there are tons of shows.
No single one game will be worth a sub ... at least to me. If STEAM has a sub (all you can play for $10 .. and every game in their library), i certainly will be interested.
But a SINGLE GAME? not likely .. not for me.
Developers know a vocal minority will be upset by the change (a vocal minority is upset at any change; a vocal minority is upset if nothing happens!)
The only sort of speaking that matters to developers is whether players are buying the games. With that in mind:
- Players shouldn't speak about innocuous purchases like cosmetics, conveniences, time-savers, and content. These are all things that it's generally agreed don't ruin a game. Some exceptions exist, but not many (for example if your game is Barbie Fashion Contest 2015, then selling cosmetics is actually P2W.)
- Players should speak out about true P2W. If a purchase causes a game's challenges to require less skill, then that's true P2W. Most consider this to work against the main point of games.
- Players should speak out about bad game design. This includes excessive timesinks that might be implemented with the intent to sell time-savers.
And again, all of this "speaking" needs to happen through your wallets.The main strength of F2P is players speak with total clarity. You will never pay money to a F2P game you dislike, because you've played 80% of the game for free before money changed hands. Conversely, you can much more easily accidentally spend money on a B2P game you dislike (Minecraft doesn't know or care that I disliked it; they have my money, so from their point of view I was one more player speaking in favor of it.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
and yet most f2p players leeches and as you said .. 80% left soon. Sure .. the whales are exploited .. may be one week, may be longer.
But most players are not whales .. so whatever you said only applies to a small minority of players.
Plus ... even for a whale .. how many free games would he play before he got snatched up?
And .. do you have a cite for the ONE WEEK WINDOW comment? I don't quite believe it.
Can't generalize everything under 1 umbrella.