One thing that strikes me odd about the cash shops in subscription games so far is that they have not been a benefit to their respective games.
Both champions and STO are woefully underdeveloped and lacking content, but cryptic thinks it is appropriate to sell content they have specifically withheld from their customers.
SOE has ushered in several various methods of cash shop style items into many of their games, but at the same time their development cycles for the standard "free" content releases has increased or suffered delays across the board. To often the phrase "not enough resources" has been echoed in response to lack of content or some flaw in the game.
So where is all of this extra money going to?
Without even touching the FTP vs P2P issue, I cannot see where the benefit of giving money on top of a subscription fee is coming from. All I see is people giving extra money to companies that are spending less and less time developing their games.
Paying more for less doesn't sound like a good bargain in my book and just makes no sense to see people defending that, but that doesn't seem to stop some people.
To be quite honest, up until, well... yesterday, I was fine with microtransactions, then I got slapped in the face repeatedly by several of my favorite games, and well... I think I'm starting to become a SOE and Cryptic hater, as well as an F2P hater...
In the past few months it seems like a lot of devs are jumping on the item mall bandwagon but not really understanding how it works. The issues with that are exacerbated by the fact that they are targeting an audience that is hostile to the business model to begin with.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I look at RMT on a case by case basis. I think the only RMT I have purchased for a game was some cosmetic armor in EQ2, but that was reasonable to me.
I bought packs for the online card game as well, but I bought them because I liked the game, not because I was hoping for phat lewtz.
My wife bought plenty of RMT for Runes of Magic, which I supported because she was enjoying the game, and I believe in paying people for creating quality products. MMO's or not.
Usually, it's not that I have a problem with RMT, I have a problem with either the quality or the presentation of the RMT. I realize I'm in the minority on these forums, but I'm clearly not the minority when it comes to the players as a whole, since this RMT is increasingly widespread.
Exactly the reason I can't move onto a new MMO because I don't like the F2P approach on the cash shop with over powered items and over priced items. Now because of SOE games are adopting the P2P with cash shop which is just getting out of hand next thing you know we are going to have to pay for each and every update.
After the next couple games release (SW:TOR, and FFXIV) I will wait and see exactly what there approach will be and if it's going to turn out like all these other games I'm just quitting. I have no need to play MMO's anymore if these companies keep trying to nickel and dime us.
The problem wasn't that it was a limited edition due to the holidays. It's that the emotes in particular were available in game as purchasable items. Yes, even though the MMO community has been rallying behind the idea that microtransaction items should be available through in-game means, when a microtransaction appears that offers something already available in game, complaints appear.
You've got that backwards and focused on the entirely wrong thing in the Aion package problem.
Aion players didn't want the silly emote. The only thing of value from those packs were the unavailable in game dyes. The worst part was that in order to the one time use dyes for ONE CHARACTER ONLY you ended up paying additional money for things you probably already had (the emotes). There's almost no value to those packages, especially not for $10 a pop.
So you had a double whammy, first you're paying for a one time use thing (the dyes) and paying for something you probably already had.
Also your point about complaining that something should be available in game and via money is backwards. People want things available WITHOUT paying. Most rational players don't want someone's disposable income to be the sole measure of ability within a game. They aren't complaining that they can buy something now. They complain when game changing things are purchasable.
the main problem with RMT, in my opinion, is COMMUNICATION (or lack thereof),
To avoid RMT abuse which originates from the developer taking advantage of a loyal customer and his attachment to the game, the developer has to communicate CLEARLY before the game launches how their revenue model will work and, if they chose to sell virtual items, what sort of virtual items will be sold.
SOE has introduced RMT in games which have been around for years, and in the case of SWG (which you failed to mention in your article) they did so via the trading card game scam/lotery and one needs to look at the forums over there to realise how upset the players are.
"I have talked to many people within companies, from those managing PR, customer service reps, producers, designers, and CEOs (even McQuaid and Smedley). These people are passionate about their games. They love meeting and learning from their community. They want players to be happy, because they understand the basic concept of business and customer service: a happy customer is a paying customer."
i'm sorry, but smedley is not a bit interested in making his players happy.
i am shocked that someone as knowledgeable as you about mmorpgs would state such a thing when SOE has gone above and beyond in recent years to introduce, change, nerf, remove, destroy at will without taking into account the players and what they want.
Smedley thinks short term - quick money grab actions are better than long term profits which result from cultivating a happy and loyal playerbase and expanding it through word of mouth. and no, he DOESN'T understand the basic concept of business. he is there in his little office thinking of new ways to cash out of his MMO's than making a quality product or improving existing ones people will purchase and play. he gets away with it because, as i said, he already has paying customers playing his games and knows that some will be reluctant to leave behind the years they spent in that game.
i am confident SOE has proven this on several occasions in their games ranging from Vanguard, EQ I and II, SWG, etc.
Well first of all thanks Jaime for reading the forums and picking up on this topic for something "official". As someone who was asking for that to happen I appreciate that you did it.
I personally don't think a "Subs Plus" payment model should exist at all. Remember all of these items that are sold in cash shops used to be the kind of things you'd get for no extra charge with your subscription. If we allow them to make Subs Plus the "standard" billing system then its going to be our own fault when the "Plus" part becomes bigger and bigger offering more and more "totally voluntary" items. Is the leveling grind too hard? Just buy EXP potions. Need to respec but already used your free once monthly respec? Just buy a another one. I would be amazed if a large number of people actually believed that this isn't how Subs Plus will end up working out. And the best part is players who pay for items will all say "Its not that bad, L2P loser". All those content updates every few months? Yep those are gonna be "Adventure Packs" but they'll only cost 9.99.. Course they'll have things like skill buffs or stat bonus' so if you don't buy them you'll be behind the curve..
I'm not at the point to where I think Subs Plus will become the standard. Once I reach that point I'll start fighting for "Subs Only" server type. Where people who only want to pay the subs can play on equal ground against that don't use all the "Plus" features.
p.s. Where did you get "Subscription Plus" from? Just curious
Oh and on the topic of Aion... afaik the issue was with the fact that the item packs really offered very little in the way of items for the price tag attached to it. As someone else said the only item that was really worth anything was the dyes and the very limited amount available once per purchase was nowhere near worth the 10 bucks they're asking for the items.
Jaime, I think if you spent more time down here in the trenches talking with us and less time rubbing elbows with Smedley and other industry "insiders" you'd know the answer to your questions and you wouldn't be as confused as you assume the rest of us to be. How many times have you posted on these forums under your handle? Yeah, that's my point.
The problem is that these companies, and it's not just in the CFO's office, don't really give a rats' ass what we think. These sentiments have been expressed here (and ignored by you and all the others in the gaming media as well as by the companies) and in fact on the official forums of said companies. Yet you and the rest fail (I hate using the word, but, it applies) in epic proportion when it comes to continuously engaging us and more important acting on our expressed wishes. Instead you write articles such as this claiming that we are "confused" and "don't know what we want". Sorry sister that just isn't the case.
The gamers aren't listened to and I don't think you (media) and the companies are even remotely sincere in any "extended hand" efforts to listen. If that were the case we'd have already seen gaming summits extending invitations to various forum members of gaming communities across the globe (not just in New York and Los Angeles) to have face to face sit downs. Instead we see the same old industry member only gatherings supposing to discuss the current situation in gaming that turn into mutual appreciation back petting events and a continuation of the status quo.
What do gamers get in return? We get to type responses on forums and that's it. You (media) and those companies know full well nothing is going to change and that our responses on these forums will either be deleted, heavily moderated or ignored altogether.
But hey, I and many others passionate about gaming have plenty of free time. I challenge you and this site to step up and become a leader and get the ball rolling on such a gathering of actual gamers. I can certainly afford the plane ticket and hotel costs and would be there to voice opinion in a genuine environment.
The ball is not in our (gamer's) court. It's in yours (media and companies). You have access to our email addresses to set things up and then invite us. So, what are you all going to do?
P.S. The cynic in me bets this sincere, non-flammatory response a) doesn't get a lengthy engaging response and b) that if it does even get a response no action by the people who can do something (media sites or gaming companies) on a annual basis at least will come of it. Should A and B happen as I state it's very telling. Very telling.
Edit: I'm leaving to go camping for the weekend in an hour or so so I'll check back on this thread on Sunday afternoon when I get home. I eagerly look forward see what, if anything, is said in response.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Personaly, I have a strong preference for games that DON'T offer ANY RMT cash shops.... In the same way I have a strong preference for those "One Price - All Inclusive Vacation Deals".
It's not that I think that RMT's are evil.....or philosophicaly wrong..... it's just that they can strongly detract from the ENJOYMENT of the game..... and at the end...that's what we are actually paying for....ENTERTAINMENT.
Playing a game isn't all that different, when you get right down to it, then going on a vacation.
You are there for enjoyment and for a little escape from your every day life. That includes not having to worry about getting that report in be the deadline AND not having to worry about paying the mortgage. Getting nickle and dimed for every little thing you do.....and wondering if you have enough money to really have fun or you are spending too much money on your vacation really detract from that feeling of escape.
The "One Price - All Inclusive Vacation Deals" places recognize that.....and it's one of the reasons they are so popular. All you really have to worry about is whether you can afford to pay the fee up front. Once you've decided that.... you can basicaly kick back and relax for a week ...and not have to worry about money or opening your wallet or whether you can afford to do X .... you can just forget all that and get as much or as little enjoyment out of the experience as you desire.
I think game execs need to be reminded that alot of the value of the products they offer are tied to that.....the ability of the consumer to kick back, relax for a few hours and escape the daily grind of bills, budgets, deadlines and money hassles.
When they open up cash shops there is a REAL danger that they are starting to impinge on the very basic value of the products they offer to the consumer in the first place.
For all the people out there that demanded their games become more life-like or 'real', they are getting exactly what they wanted but in a way they never bet on. Game companies are just doing what every other industry already does; they realize that people with more money will spend more money and that the vast majority of people are too apathetic to care about small things These companies take a little bit more every go around in the hopes that it will one day equal a much greater take than they could possibly hope for in taking it all at once. If a game came out today that offered max level toons with much better gear than anyone could possibly get in game for $500 a pop they might not get their foot in the door to many homes, but a game like WoW, slowly making changes towards that goal in small stages will always retain a large portion of their sub population. How can you expect game companies to do anything differently if players keep allowing them to do so?
Valve basically took what they said they were going to give players of left 4 dead for free and straight up said, 'hey, we made so much cool stuff for you guys we decided to put it all into another game and charge you full price for it!'. Upwards to 50k people had joined the boycott of the game and what did it get Valve? A game that sold almost twice as many copies as the original. One site I read claimed that almost 60% of the steam members in the boycott group had been seen playing the sequel during launch week. The point here is people are ready to scream and cry on the internet because its easy but the second the new bright and shiny toy comes out the sheeple jump right in with both feet.
Me and my GF almost quit EQ2 when LoN came out since its just gambling for items for with real money. We did quit when Station cash came out, and we as well as many others will never touch another $oE game because of it.
How do you think people will react when they are lied to for greed ?
Simply put we are not stupid sheep and do not promote the trend they are trying to get away with. People can turn a blind eye to it as they do with bigger issues like the government corruption or they can make a stand for whats right.
You choose with your actions.
I would like to express my actions to Smedbucks in person though : P
I have never and never will buy a game that requires that Nazi software. I do not do pre orders anymore and dont pay for console ports after this last couple of years.
I suppose I make more of stand than most but its my money and I wont pay for the cheap and greedy actions that seem to be the new trend.
Have lots to reply to, so I apologize if this comes off fragmented a bit. Also, I had no idea that today would make this discussion more interesting due to two things: Allods Online's cash shop opening, and the "Cha-Ching" workshop being announced.
I know that many of you are arguing that we are not confused about how we feel about MTs in sub games - but we are sending a mixed message. Forums may be full of "this is crap" posts, and yet the items sell (and sell and sell). One voice in the community will say "We do not want MTs," but the company will ask "Would you pay for a cute rare mount?" and customers will turn around and say "Yes!" It's not a matter of individual confusion; it's a matter of community confusion and whose concerns are reaching the ears of the companies.
There will always be people in the community who will buy the stuff offered - and always people who refuse. We can't pretend otherwise. However, if a game's community (as a whole) says one thing about microtransactions, and does another, what is the game company supposed to take as a direction?
Shelby13 said this well in the beginning of the thread: "Micro-transactions don't work unless players pay.. and if they are non-vital cosmetic items.. what does it say about the playerbase who is so wiling to pay more." The number of people paying for these items is not insignificant.
Re: Aion - yes, part of the problem was "the ridiculous price." I didn't touch on that as well as I should of, but you are right about that aspect of the package. However, I think the price of the package speaks well for itself - just as the Allods Online cash shop is doing very well at speaking for itself today.
(also, girlgeek: You are right; I do often play devil's advocate and I do not always make my views as transparent as people think I do.)
Troneas: Nice focus on smudging Smedley. (That was kind of fun to say.) I can smudge developer names too, and there are a few that I do not like, even ones I have talked to. You're reading a little too much into my words.
Short point: They want their players happy. Long point: that doesn't imply they know how to achieve that goal. Never said that they did.
Simsu: "p.s. Where did you get "Subscription Plus" from? Just curious " - I don't know. Things get a little hazy at 1am in the morning.
Khalathwyr: Yeah, I don't spend a lot of time chatting "down in the trenches." I also know that the MMORPG.com trenches aren't a full and proper representation of the MMO community. I like you guys, but my sample size goes beyond these forums. As for rubbing elbows, well, I talk to these people less than once a week on average; the rest is spent with the community. There's a fine art of playing reporter and gamer at once - message me about it sometime, I'd be happy to go into detail.
You are right. The players have spoken in the forums about how they feel about microtransactions. They have also spoken about how they can't wait to buy the next little My LIttle Pony. And they speak, more loudly, with the amount of money they give a company when microtransactions are rolled out. And money speaks louder than words.
The reason players aren't being listened to - besides those who are trenched into corporate greed - is that players (again, we're talking as a whole, not individuals) are saying they're against the idea, while handing over the cash. Does it surprise you that an upcoming workshop about virtual monetization is being called "Cha-Ching"? Of course not. It shouldn't surprise anyone. We know - I acknowledged- there are people in these companies who are rollin' up the dollar bills and smokin'. And by our actions, not our words, we tell them that this is OK.
Companies are doing research, and (poor or not), their research is finding that players will pay real money for items even after a subscription fee. They don't even have to ask, really: all they have to do is look at their sales.
Also, Khalathwyr, props on the idea of forming some sort of organization or conference to make our anti-RMT mission clear. It's a pity that the media companies are going to stay neutral in the matter (tip: I don't work for a media company, I'm an independent writer who makes money off the work I submit and nothing more) and players will doubtfully rally behind a manifesto even if we tried.
Just an additional thought: a developer once told me that out of a $15 subscription fee, only a third of that goes toward all the actual costs of playing the game, from development, server maintenance, and staffing. The rest, he said, is profit. Think of where that puts RMTs on the list.
Personally, I don't have a problem with microtransactions provided that they are priced appropriately (I'm looking at Requiem's points packages and using that as a base) and that the items on sale are available in-game as well.
Going back to Gravity's points packages for Requiem, you can buy a lot of points for 10 bucks. Those points can go a long way, depending on how you use them. The CS in Requiem provides items only available in the CS, but those are aesthetic. The big sellers, such as lucky packs, break down into items you can get in game such as xeons and ingame currency, for the most part.
Compare this to say, DDO, which in my opinion entered the f2p market with very steep prices in its CS. Granted, they run sales all the time, but overall it would have made Turbine much more money if they had charged much less for just about everything, which they are now figuring out.
Just a few thoughts I felt like sharing, and yes I agree as a community we need to become a vocal majority, and not let the vocal minority continue to run this industry into the ground.
I point I was trying to make in my previous post (lost in the wall of text no doubt) was my concerns about what happens to subscription-based game quality when the 'Cha-Ching' big bucks are in the 'extra' micro-transactions.
So.. you drop a $$$ Million or so in development. You pay $$ Thousand per month for on-going staff & development. You make $$$ thousand per month based on a subscription base.
Micro-Transactions add another $$$ per month... but ONLY if the items are rare/unique or otherwise unobtainable via 'regular subscription' means.
So... in order to 'protect' your MT based $$$ revenue.. you simply CANNOT offer those items to 'regular' subscription users otherwise they lose their value.
So.. MT-based items are almost always better quality ... and Subscription-based content gets 2nd fiddle.
For those folks who can only afford subscription fees and cannot 'keep up with the Joneses' in Micro-Transaction 'extras'... ultimately lose out on game content.
Inevitably we end up with 2-classes of player. Those who can afford to buy the better items.. and those who cannot.
It's like having 2 games... 1 for the elite with cash... 1 for those who just want the basics. 2 FOR 1... what business wouldn't want that kind of income model.
I suspect we might see more of this in the future.
Interesting article, but don't be so quick to pat Cryptic on the back; it can be argued that STO already broke that promise with the races it offered on opening day. Whether or not it continues on from there is anyone's guess, but considering all the pre-launch marketing tactics they used, I'm guessing you will see more stuff that is game effecting offered in the stores. Respecs anyone?
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
I'm one of the players that quit EQ after SOE introduced Station Cash, and will not likely play another SOE game for a very long time. I wouldn't have minded if they were only selling vanity-items. But as soon as you sell items that have an effect in-game, I'm not paying to play anymore.
I'm currently playing WoW, and watching their moneygrabbing skills with fluff-items for desperate pet-collectors is actually starting to leave a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. Not sour enough for me to quit, but I wouldn't be surprised if they soon start selling a few heirloom items as well. If that happens, I'll just have to find another MMORPG to call my home yet again.
Companies are doing research, and (poor or not), their research is finding that players will pay real money for items even after a subscription fee. They don't even have to ask, really: all they have to do is look at their sales. Just an additional thought: a developer once told me that out of a $15 subscription fee, only a third of that goes toward all the actual costs of playing the game, from development, server maintenance, and staffing. The rest, he said, is profit. Think of where that puts RMTs on the list.
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions or box sales by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has mostly been applied on existing games (talking about heavy-weight MMOs with a monthly subscription plan). I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
Companies are doing research, and (poor or not), their research is finding that players will pay real money for items even after a subscription fee. They don't even have to ask, really: all they have to do is look at their sales. Just an additional thought: a developer once told me that out of a $15 subscription fee, only a third of that goes toward all the actual costs of playing the game, from development, server maintenance, and staffing. The rest, he said, is profit. Think of where that puts RMTs on the list.
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has been applied on existing games. I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
I just don't understand why you guys ignore the facts. Most people don't care about rmt. If everyone who despised rmt quit it would be a drop in the bucket for mmo developers. Let's just use some quick and dirty calculations. We'll use the basic number of 2 billion gross spent on rmt in a given year. we'll then take the total amount of mmo players at around 20 million (13 million wow, 4 million lineage, a few 500k mmos, and lots of smaller ones. Divide 20 million into 2 billion and what do you get? 100. That says that on average every person playing mmos spends rougly $100 per year on rmt.
Now of course that's not true. You obviously don't spend money on rmt, and plenty of others here don't as well. I also have plenty of friends who wouldn't either. However at a certain point you can make an educated guess as to what the max cap is for any one person. Odds are that most people wouldn't spend more than $200 in a given year on rmt (although we know that people have spent $1000 or more on some accounts), so if you make an educated guess and say the average figure is anywhere from $100 - $200 yearly, you're talking anywhere from 50% to 100% of the mmo population participating in rmt. If you take out the fact that we know that plenty of people don't spend money on rmt, I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that roughly 50-75% of the population spend money on rmt. That's a pretty startling figure.
Now just because people don't participate in rmt doesn't mean they'd ever quit a game over it. Only the most fanatical of the bunch would take something so insignificant to such an extreme. When you take that into consideration, I find it hard for developers to be concerned in any way about the small amount of people who would actually leave their game because of rmt. Furthermore, given the drastic increase of free mmos with cash shop models THAT AREN'T GOING OUT OF BUSINESS, I think that it is abundantly clear just how many people participate in rmt, and have absolutely no problem spending money on a game beyond a subscription.
Either Missy got a job at a RMT game or this is a serious trolling article :P
Its quite clear that 99% of the playerbase dont want RMT in P2P games yet this article tries to justify RMT trading and telling us its something we want.
I think this is exactly a problem we see in other aspects, such as gameplay, our preferances and what the gamers want.
the CEO:s and up already have basic ideas what they want implanted, then they go check what players wants.
999 players says they DONT want it in the game and 1 say they do. And then they go with the 1 person totally ignoring everything else.
The problem with RMT is that some players will buy that +25% exp pot for 10h or 100% crit in crafting scroll, and then other players that absolutly DONT want to buy RMT items HAVE to buy it to be able to compete with those that buys them, and the companies knows this and its really sickening how greedy and ignorant MMO companies are becoming.
Ill say it again, theres WAY to many suits in the MMO business today that tries to make games for thei wallets, and there wont be any good new MMO becouse its not like the suits will fire themselves to make room for the developers that tries to make games for the players, its no wonder people like MJ left Mythic...and was replaces by a Suit (Sith)
Either Missy got a job at a RMT game or this is a serious trolling article :P Its quite clear that 99% of the playerbase dont want RMT in P2P games yet this article tries to justify RMT trading and telling us its something we want. I think this is exactly a problem we see in other aspects, such as gameplay, our preferances and what the gamers want. the CEO:s and up already have basic ideas what they want implanted, then they go check what players wants. 999 players says they DONT want it in the game and 1 say they do. And then they go with the 1 person totally ignoring everything else. The problem with RMT is that some players will buy that +25% exp pot for 10h or 100% crit in crafting scroll, and then other players that absolutly DONT want to buy RMT items HAVE to buy it to be able to compete with those that buys them, and the companies knows this and its really sickening how greedy and ignorant MMO companies are becoming. Ill say it again, theres WAY to many suits in the MMO business today that tries to make games for thei wallets, and there wont be any good new MMO becouse its not like the suits will fire themselves to make room for the developers that tries to make games for the players, its no wonder people like MJ left Mythic...and was replaces by a Suit (Sith)
Please read the post before yours and tell me how you can say that 99% of the playerbase is against rmt with a straight face?
This is a 2 billion dollar a year industry you're talking about. Using my quick and dirty figures from my last post, you're saying that roughly 200k people (20 million x .01) participate in rmt, spending nearly $10,000 per year on rmt (2 billion / 200k). Do you really believe that?
You guys continue to prove my point that you gloss over the facts and just make this stuff up as you go.
Comments
One thing that strikes me odd about the cash shops in subscription games so far is that they have not been a benefit to their respective games.
Both champions and STO are woefully underdeveloped and lacking content, but cryptic thinks it is appropriate to sell content they have specifically withheld from their customers.
SOE has ushered in several various methods of cash shop style items into many of their games, but at the same time their development cycles for the standard "free" content releases has increased or suffered delays across the board. To often the phrase "not enough resources" has been echoed in response to lack of content or some flaw in the game.
So where is all of this extra money going to?
Without even touching the FTP vs P2P issue, I cannot see where the benefit of giving money on top of a subscription fee is coming from. All I see is people giving extra money to companies that are spending less and less time developing their games.
Paying more for less doesn't sound like a good bargain in my book and just makes no sense to see people defending that, but that doesn't seem to stop some people.
In the past few months it seems like a lot of devs are jumping on the item mall bandwagon but not really understanding how it works. The issues with that are exacerbated by the fact that they are targeting an audience that is hostile to the business model to begin with.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I look at RMT on a case by case basis. I think the only RMT I have purchased for a game was some cosmetic armor in EQ2, but that was reasonable to me.
I bought packs for the online card game as well, but I bought them because I liked the game, not because I was hoping for phat lewtz.
My wife bought plenty of RMT for Runes of Magic, which I supported because she was enjoying the game, and I believe in paying people for creating quality products. MMO's or not.
Usually, it's not that I have a problem with RMT, I have a problem with either the quality or the presentation of the RMT. I realize I'm in the minority on these forums, but I'm clearly not the minority when it comes to the players as a whole, since this RMT is increasingly widespread.
Prax
Exactly the reason I can't move onto a new MMO because I don't like the F2P approach on the cash shop with over powered items and over priced items. Now because of SOE games are adopting the P2P with cash shop which is just getting out of hand next thing you know we are going to have to pay for each and every update.
After the next couple games release (SW:TOR, and FFXIV) I will wait and see exactly what there approach will be and if it's going to turn out like all these other games I'm just quitting. I have no need to play MMO's anymore if these companies keep trying to nickel and dime us.
You've got that backwards and focused on the entirely wrong thing in the Aion package problem.
Aion players didn't want the silly emote. The only thing of value from those packs were the unavailable in game dyes. The worst part was that in order to the one time use dyes for ONE CHARACTER ONLY you ended up paying additional money for things you probably already had (the emotes). There's almost no value to those packages, especially not for $10 a pop.
So you had a double whammy, first you're paying for a one time use thing (the dyes) and paying for something you probably already had.
Also your point about complaining that something should be available in game and via money is backwards. People want things available WITHOUT paying. Most rational players don't want someone's disposable income to be the sole measure of ability within a game. They aren't complaining that they can buy something now. They complain when game changing things are purchasable.
the main problem with RMT, in my opinion, is COMMUNICATION (or lack thereof),
To avoid RMT abuse which originates from the developer taking advantage of a loyal customer and his attachment to the game, the developer has to communicate CLEARLY before the game launches how their revenue model will work and, if they chose to sell virtual items, what sort of virtual items will be sold.
SOE has introduced RMT in games which have been around for years, and in the case of SWG (which you failed to mention in your article) they did so via the trading card game scam/lotery and one needs to look at the forums over there to realise how upset the players are.
"I have talked to many people within companies, from those managing PR, customer service reps, producers, designers, and CEOs (even McQuaid and Smedley). These people are passionate about their games. They love meeting and learning from their community. They want players to be happy, because they understand the basic concept of business and customer service: a happy customer is a paying customer."
i'm sorry, but smedley is not a bit interested in making his players happy.
i am shocked that someone as knowledgeable as you about mmorpgs would state such a thing when SOE has gone above and beyond in recent years to introduce, change, nerf, remove, destroy at will without taking into account the players and what they want.
Smedley thinks short term - quick money grab actions are better than long term profits which result from cultivating a happy and loyal playerbase and expanding it through word of mouth. and no, he DOESN'T understand the basic concept of business. he is there in his little office thinking of new ways to cash out of his MMO's than making a quality product or improving existing ones people will purchase and play. he gets away with it because, as i said, he already has paying customers playing his games and knows that some will be reluctant to leave behind the years they spent in that game.
i am confident SOE has proven this on several occasions in their games ranging from Vanguard, EQ I and II, SWG, etc.
great use of the Futurama's robot devil image! lol
Well first of all thanks Jaime for reading the forums and picking up on this topic for something "official". As someone who was asking for that to happen I appreciate that you did it.
I personally don't think a "Subs Plus" payment model should exist at all. Remember all of these items that are sold in cash shops used to be the kind of things you'd get for no extra charge with your subscription. If we allow them to make Subs Plus the "standard" billing system then its going to be our own fault when the "Plus" part becomes bigger and bigger offering more and more "totally voluntary" items. Is the leveling grind too hard? Just buy EXP potions. Need to respec but already used your free once monthly respec? Just buy a another one. I would be amazed if a large number of people actually believed that this isn't how Subs Plus will end up working out. And the best part is players who pay for items will all say "Its not that bad, L2P loser". All those content updates every few months? Yep those are gonna be "Adventure Packs" but they'll only cost 9.99.. Course they'll have things like skill buffs or stat bonus' so if you don't buy them you'll be behind the curve..
I'm not at the point to where I think Subs Plus will become the standard. Once I reach that point I'll start fighting for "Subs Only" server type. Where people who only want to pay the subs can play on equal ground against that don't use all the "Plus" features.
p.s. Where did you get "Subscription Plus" from? Just curious
Oh and on the topic of Aion... afaik the issue was with the fact that the item packs really offered very little in the way of items for the price tag attached to it. As someone else said the only item that was really worth anything was the dyes and the very limited amount available once per purchase was nowhere near worth the 10 bucks they're asking for the items.
when you combine rmt and ptp thats is when it becomes bad, sto anybody.
Jaime, I think if you spent more time down here in the trenches talking with us and less time rubbing elbows with Smedley and other industry "insiders" you'd know the answer to your questions and you wouldn't be as confused as you assume the rest of us to be. How many times have you posted on these forums under your handle? Yeah, that's my point.
The problem is that these companies, and it's not just in the CFO's office, don't really give a rats' ass what we think. These sentiments have been expressed here (and ignored by you and all the others in the gaming media as well as by the companies) and in fact on the official forums of said companies. Yet you and the rest fail (I hate using the word, but, it applies) in epic proportion when it comes to continuously engaging us and more important acting on our expressed wishes. Instead you write articles such as this claiming that we are "confused" and "don't know what we want". Sorry sister that just isn't the case.
The gamers aren't listened to and I don't think you (media) and the companies are even remotely sincere in any "extended hand" efforts to listen. If that were the case we'd have already seen gaming summits extending invitations to various forum members of gaming communities across the globe (not just in New York and Los Angeles) to have face to face sit downs. Instead we see the same old industry member only gatherings supposing to discuss the current situation in gaming that turn into mutual appreciation back petting events and a continuation of the status quo.
What do gamers get in return? We get to type responses on forums and that's it. You (media) and those companies know full well nothing is going to change and that our responses on these forums will either be deleted, heavily moderated or ignored altogether.
But hey, I and many others passionate about gaming have plenty of free time. I challenge you and this site to step up and become a leader and get the ball rolling on such a gathering of actual gamers. I can certainly afford the plane ticket and hotel costs and would be there to voice opinion in a genuine environment.
The ball is not in our (gamer's) court. It's in yours (media and companies). You have access to our email addresses to set things up and then invite us. So, what are you all going to do?
P.S. The cynic in me bets this sincere, non-flammatory response a) doesn't get a lengthy engaging response and b) that if it does even get a response no action by the people who can do something (media sites or gaming companies) on a annual basis at least will come of it. Should A and B happen as I state it's very telling. Very telling.
Edit: I'm leaving to go camping for the weekend in an hour or so so I'll check back on this thread on Sunday afternoon when I get home. I eagerly look forward see what, if anything, is said in response.
"Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."
Chavez y Chavez
Charlie Daniel's Band - devil went down to georgia. a bluegrass band from carolina i believe.
Personaly, I have a strong preference for games that DON'T offer ANY RMT cash shops.... In the same way I have a strong preference for those "One Price - All Inclusive Vacation Deals".
It's not that I think that RMT's are evil.....or philosophicaly wrong..... it's just that they can strongly detract from the ENJOYMENT of the game..... and at the end...that's what we are actually paying for....ENTERTAINMENT.
Playing a game isn't all that different, when you get right down to it, then going on a vacation.
You are there for enjoyment and for a little escape from your every day life. That includes not having to worry about getting that report in be the deadline AND not having to worry about paying the mortgage. Getting nickle and dimed for every little thing you do.....and wondering if you have enough money to really have fun or you are spending too much money on your vacation really detract from that feeling of escape.
The "One Price - All Inclusive Vacation Deals" places recognize that.....and it's one of the reasons they are so popular. All you really have to worry about is whether you can afford to pay the fee up front. Once you've decided that.... you can basicaly kick back and relax for a week ...and not have to worry about money or opening your wallet or whether you can afford to do X .... you can just forget all that and get as much or as little enjoyment out of the experience as you desire.
I think game execs need to be reminded that alot of the value of the products they offer are tied to that.....the ability of the consumer to kick back, relax for a few hours and escape the daily grind of bills, budgets, deadlines and money hassles.
When they open up cash shops there is a REAL danger that they are starting to impinge on the very basic value of the products they offer to the consumer in the first place.
For all the people out there that demanded their games become more life-like or 'real', they are getting exactly what they wanted but in a way they never bet on. Game companies are just doing what every other industry already does; they realize that people with more money will spend more money and that the vast majority of people are too apathetic to care about small things These companies take a little bit more every go around in the hopes that it will one day equal a much greater take than they could possibly hope for in taking it all at once. If a game came out today that offered max level toons with much better gear than anyone could possibly get in game for $500 a pop they might not get their foot in the door to many homes, but a game like WoW, slowly making changes towards that goal in small stages will always retain a large portion of their sub population. How can you expect game companies to do anything differently if players keep allowing them to do so?
Valve basically took what they said they were going to give players of left 4 dead for free and straight up said, 'hey, we made so much cool stuff for you guys we decided to put it all into another game and charge you full price for it!'. Upwards to 50k people had joined the boycott of the game and what did it get Valve? A game that sold almost twice as many copies as the original. One site I read claimed that almost 60% of the steam members in the boycott group had been seen playing the sequel during launch week. The point here is people are ready to scream and cry on the internet because its easy but the second the new bright and shiny toy comes out the sheeple jump right in with both feet.
Me and my GF almost quit EQ2 when LoN came out since its just gambling for items for with real money. We did quit when Station cash came out, and we as well as many others will never touch another $oE game because of it.
How do you think people will react when they are lied to for greed ?
Simply put we are not stupid sheep and do not promote the trend they are trying to get away with. People can turn a blind eye to it as they do with bigger issues like the government corruption or they can make a stand for whats right.
You choose with your actions.
I would like to express my actions to Smedbucks in person though : P
Ahh Steam'ing pile : (
I have never and never will buy a game that requires that Nazi software. I do not do pre orders anymore and dont pay for console ports after this last couple of years.
I suppose I make more of stand than most but its my money and I wont pay for the cheap and greedy actions that seem to be the new trend.
Heh I had to blow off some "Steam" there.
Have lots to reply to, so I apologize if this comes off fragmented a bit. Also, I had no idea that today would make this discussion more interesting due to two things: Allods Online's cash shop opening, and the "Cha-Ching" workshop being announced.
I know that many of you are arguing that we are not confused about how we feel about MTs in sub games - but we are sending a mixed message. Forums may be full of "this is crap" posts, and yet the items sell (and sell and sell). One voice in the community will say "We do not want MTs," but the company will ask "Would you pay for a cute rare mount?" and customers will turn around and say "Yes!" It's not a matter of individual confusion; it's a matter of community confusion and whose concerns are reaching the ears of the companies.
There will always be people in the community who will buy the stuff offered - and always people who refuse. We can't pretend otherwise. However, if a game's community (as a whole) says one thing about microtransactions, and does another, what is the game company supposed to take as a direction?
Shelby13 said this well in the beginning of the thread: "Micro-transactions don't work unless players pay.. and if they are non-vital cosmetic items.. what does it say about the playerbase who is so wiling to pay more." The number of people paying for these items is not insignificant.
Re: Aion - yes, part of the problem was "the ridiculous price." I didn't touch on that as well as I should of, but you are right about that aspect of the package. However, I think the price of the package speaks well for itself - just as the Allods Online cash shop is doing very well at speaking for itself today.
(also, girlgeek: You are right; I do often play devil's advocate and I do not always make my views as transparent as people think I do.)
Troneas: Nice focus on smudging Smedley. (That was kind of fun to say.) I can smudge developer names too, and there are a few that I do not like, even ones I have talked to. You're reading a little too much into my words.
Short point: They want their players happy. Long point: that doesn't imply they know how to achieve that goal. Never said that they did.
Simsu: "p.s. Where did you get "Subscription Plus" from? Just curious
" - I don't know. Things get a little hazy at 1am in the morning.
Khalathwyr: Yeah, I don't spend a lot of time chatting "down in the trenches." I also know that the MMORPG.com trenches aren't a full and proper representation of the MMO community. I like you guys, but my sample size goes beyond these forums. As for rubbing elbows, well, I talk to these people less than once a week on average; the rest is spent with the community. There's a fine art of playing reporter and gamer at once - message me about it sometime, I'd be happy to go into detail.
You are right. The players have spoken in the forums about how they feel about microtransactions. They have also spoken about how they can't wait to buy the next little My LIttle Pony. And they speak, more loudly, with the amount of money they give a company when microtransactions are rolled out. And money speaks louder than words.
The reason players aren't being listened to - besides those who are trenched into corporate greed - is that players (again, we're talking as a whole, not individuals) are saying they're against the idea, while handing over the cash. Does it surprise you that an upcoming workshop about virtual monetization is being called "Cha-Ching"? Of course not. It shouldn't surprise anyone. We know - I acknowledged- there are people in these companies who are rollin' up the dollar bills and smokin'. And by our actions, not our words, we tell them that this is OK.
Companies are doing research, and (poor or not), their research is finding that players will pay real money for items even after a subscription fee. They don't even have to ask, really: all they have to do is look at their sales.
Also, Khalathwyr, props on the idea of forming some sort of organization or conference to make our anti-RMT mission clear. It's a pity that the media companies are going to stay neutral in the matter (tip: I don't work for a media company, I'm an independent writer who makes money off the work I submit and nothing more) and players will doubtfully rally behind a manifesto even if we tried.
Just an additional thought: a developer once told me that out of a $15 subscription fee, only a third of that goes toward all the actual costs of playing the game, from development, server maintenance, and staffing. The rest, he said, is profit. Think of where that puts RMTs on the list.
Good read, Jaime, thanks for posting this.
Personally, I don't have a problem with microtransactions provided that they are priced appropriately (I'm looking at Requiem's points packages and using that as a base) and that the items on sale are available in-game as well.
Going back to Gravity's points packages for Requiem, you can buy a lot of points for 10 bucks. Those points can go a long way, depending on how you use them. The CS in Requiem provides items only available in the CS, but those are aesthetic. The big sellers, such as lucky packs, break down into items you can get in game such as xeons and ingame currency, for the most part.
Compare this to say, DDO, which in my opinion entered the f2p market with very steep prices in its CS. Granted, they run sales all the time, but overall it would have made Turbine much more money if they had charged much less for just about everything, which they are now figuring out.
Just a few thoughts I felt like sharing, and yes I agree as a community we need to become a vocal majority, and not let the vocal minority continue to run this industry into the ground.
I point I was trying to make in my previous post (lost in the wall of text no doubt) was my concerns about what happens to subscription-based game quality when the 'Cha-Ching' big bucks are in the 'extra' micro-transactions.
So.. you drop a $$$ Million or so in development. You pay $$ Thousand per month for on-going staff & development. You make $$$ thousand per month based on a subscription base.
Micro-Transactions add another $$$ per month... but ONLY if the items are rare/unique or otherwise unobtainable via 'regular subscription' means.
So... in order to 'protect' your MT based $$$ revenue.. you simply CANNOT offer those items to 'regular' subscription users otherwise they lose their value.
So.. MT-based items are almost always better quality ... and Subscription-based content gets 2nd fiddle.
For those folks who can only afford subscription fees and cannot 'keep up with the Joneses' in Micro-Transaction 'extras'... ultimately lose out on game content.
Inevitably we end up with 2-classes of player. Those who can afford to buy the better items.. and those who cannot.
It's like having 2 games... 1 for the elite with cash... 1 for those who just want the basics. 2 FOR 1... what business wouldn't want that kind of income model.
I suspect we might see more of this in the future.
SWG/STO/(SWTOR)
Interesting article, but don't be so quick to pat Cryptic on the back; it can be argued that STO already broke that promise with the races it offered on opening day. Whether or not it continues on from there is anyone's guess, but considering all the pre-launch marketing tactics they used, I'm guessing you will see more stuff that is game effecting offered in the stores. Respecs anyone?
"Oh my, how horrible, someone is criticizing a MMO. Oh yeah, that is what a forum is about, looking at both sides. You rather have to be critical of anything in this genre as of late because the track record of these major studios has just been appalling." -Ozmodan
I'm one of the players that quit EQ after SOE introduced Station Cash, and will not likely play another SOE game for a very long time. I wouldn't have minded if they were only selling vanity-items. But as soon as you sell items that have an effect in-game, I'm not paying to play anymore.
I'm currently playing WoW, and watching their moneygrabbing skills with fluff-items for desperate pet-collectors is actually starting to leave a bit of a sour taste in my mouth. Not sour enough for me to quit, but I wouldn't be surprised if they soon start selling a few heirloom items as well. If that happens, I'll just have to find another MMORPG to call my home yet again.
Slacker extraordinaire!
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions or box sales by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has mostly been applied on existing games (talking about heavy-weight MMOs with a monthly subscription plan). I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
What i wonder is if their research contemplates how much they will cease to make in the long run when their reputation as a MMO company is on the ground.
Or, if the opportunity cost of making more money out of RMT is translated into less monthly subscriptions by those who refuse to get involved in RMT and if it will pay off in the long run.
As you've said, its early days for RMT and so far it has been applied on existing games. I think we'll get a better picture a few months or years down the road.
If this were true, it would end all the "they are a business and need to make money" arguments. I am not saying that it would be wrong for a company to try and increase their profits, as long as it is done by improving their products and services which will naturally result in increased sales; or if they announce their RMT intentions from the get-go and people can decide wheather or not they will buy and play their games.
I just don't understand why you guys ignore the facts. Most people don't care about rmt. If everyone who despised rmt quit it would be a drop in the bucket for mmo developers. Let's just use some quick and dirty calculations. We'll use the basic number of 2 billion gross spent on rmt in a given year. we'll then take the total amount of mmo players at around 20 million (13 million wow, 4 million lineage, a few 500k mmos, and lots of smaller ones. Divide 20 million into 2 billion and what do you get? 100. That says that on average every person playing mmos spends rougly $100 per year on rmt.
Now of course that's not true. You obviously don't spend money on rmt, and plenty of others here don't as well. I also have plenty of friends who wouldn't either. However at a certain point you can make an educated guess as to what the max cap is for any one person. Odds are that most people wouldn't spend more than $200 in a given year on rmt (although we know that people have spent $1000 or more on some accounts), so if you make an educated guess and say the average figure is anywhere from $100 - $200 yearly, you're talking anywhere from 50% to 100% of the mmo population participating in rmt. If you take out the fact that we know that plenty of people don't spend money on rmt, I think it's fairly reasonable to assume that roughly 50-75% of the population spend money on rmt. That's a pretty startling figure.
Now just because people don't participate in rmt doesn't mean they'd ever quit a game over it. Only the most fanatical of the bunch would take something so insignificant to such an extreme. When you take that into consideration, I find it hard for developers to be concerned in any way about the small amount of people who would actually leave their game because of rmt. Furthermore, given the drastic increase of free mmos with cash shop models THAT AREN'T GOING OUT OF BUSINESS, I think that it is abundantly clear just how many people participate in rmt, and have absolutely no problem spending money on a game beyond a subscription.
Either Missy got a job at a RMT game or this is a serious trolling article :P
Its quite clear that 99% of the playerbase dont want RMT in P2P games yet this article tries to justify RMT trading and telling us its something we want.
I think this is exactly a problem we see in other aspects, such as gameplay, our preferances and what the gamers want.
the CEO:s and up already have basic ideas what they want implanted, then they go check what players wants.
999 players says they DONT want it in the game and 1 say they do. And then they go with the 1 person totally ignoring everything else.
The problem with RMT is that some players will buy that +25% exp pot for 10h or 100% crit in crafting scroll, and then other players that absolutly DONT want to buy RMT items HAVE to buy it to be able to compete with those that buys them, and the companies knows this and its really sickening how greedy and ignorant MMO companies are becoming.
Ill say it again, theres WAY to many suits in the MMO business today that tries to make games for thei wallets, and there wont be any good new MMO becouse its not like the suits will fire themselves to make room for the developers that tries to make games for the players, its no wonder people like MJ left Mythic...and was replaces by a Suit (Sith)
Please read the post before yours and tell me how you can say that 99% of the playerbase is against rmt with a straight face?
This is a 2 billion dollar a year industry you're talking about. Using my quick and dirty figures from my last post, you're saying that roughly 200k people (20 million x .01) participate in rmt, spending nearly $10,000 per year on rmt (2 billion / 200k). Do you really believe that?
You guys continue to prove my point that you gloss over the facts and just make this stuff up as you go.