Lotro didn't change anyting, it was Runescape, Free Realms, Club Penguin and GW1 that changed the industry. Without their CONTINUED success, Lotro wouldn't have changed to F2P. GW2 will just continue and reinforce the trend if it becomes successful. Even if it doesn't get more sales than all the WoW expansions put together, it will still be seen as the successful anomaly and many will want to ape that success if it becomes that great.
I believe Arenanet knows the world has its eyes on them and they will have to impress for success.
What Turbine did was to prove to the rest of the industry that a AAA title could be profitable... actually more profitable as a F2P game than with the subscription model. GW1 changed absolutely nothing as they are just using a model that FPS's have been using for years before that. Turbine introduced the multi-level payment model to the AAA MMO industry and proved that it could be successful. Sure Runescape used a similar model before that but it has never been considered a AAA MMO. Turbine was really the first to bring all of the current payment models together into one neat little package. I may not care for their games but I have to give credit where credit is due. They are changing the MMO genre as we speak.
Bren
Edit: Actually you'd have to give the B2P credit to Blizzard where RPGs are concerned. Diablo used this model years before GW was ever thought of.
I think GW2 will be alot more like GW1 than people think or people that never played GW1 have any idea about...but because of the new gen graphics and "dynamic content" some like OP think it will be the best. As far as the leveling and pvp go: low max level, not much of a grind, and lots of pvp because you can pick a max level toon with max gear and go right at it. Yes it looks good. Yes the dynamic content looks cool. Yes I will be buying it for when I start to get bored of what ever subscription MMO I will be playing. But without the $14.99 a month what you buy is what you get untill a new expansion comes out. When I pay a subscription fee I expect to see new content via patches, balancing issues covered, responsive coustomer support, ect. Now that doesn't always happen but those games (you know which ones I'm talking about) are usually the ones most call fail. With out the income generated from the subsription I just don't see how any F2P game can compete with P2P games except for micro-transactions and then alot of times you just end up paying alot more than the normal 14.99.
I've read the reviews of several different people who played the demo, they disagree with you. They believe that GW2 plays nothing like GW1, they believe it's a bigger game and yes it also looks like a more expensive one. Now let me tell you something that WE know; NCsoft is the publisher, they are a rich company with many investors and one of their most successful properties is GW1. They've seen the hype for GW2 and (if you look closely) have taken some of the ideas in GW2 and put it in their other games like B&S (situational skills and Downed skills (@ 7:30) anyone?). And you also know that even to this day, GW1 is being updated with new content that is totally free e.g; War in Kryta, Hearts of the North, Conflict in Cantha (Coming soon). So you can't claim that only a sub can deliver that, you just have to look at what Anet has done with GW1 to know that they can deliver.
I might be off the mark compeltely here, but I am sure I read in an interview waaay back when GW2 was announced, that they are moving away from a the buy2play model and thinking of adopting the normal subscription based model or some sort of hybrid....
maybe my brain playing trick os me so forgive me if i'm wrong...
*scratch that, just checked the FAQ on the official site - no subscription fee...
If GW2 becomes the dominant MMORPG I am fairly convinced that it will destroy the subscription based model. Here's why...
...
So in conclusion, what I think makes GW2 dangerous is that it is bargain priced AND it looks like it will be a quality product. All imitators MUST be priced below or equal to the industry leader to have a hope of succeeding. I don't see how the subscription model will survive (except for maybe in very small niches) if GW2 becomes the industry leader.
Agreed. And no complaints from me. There was a good reason for monthly fees when Meridian 59 released, bandwidth were really expensive then. Today are we paying mostly for support and huge profits. Wow would still make a lot of money with 5 bucks a month fees....
It might affect the quality of support we gets if more games start to do like this, but I only used that once during my entire timne as a gamer, once in AoC when a quest bugged. So waiting twice or even 3 times the time for help with that would still be a bargain compared to all money I spent on monthly fees since M59.
I never had anything to complain on in GW and they still patch in enough content, I am currently playing War in Kryta and while it isn't as huge as an expansions is it as large as any other patched in content of a MMO.
Can GW 2 deliver what it should it will change the genre. But that is something we still can't be sure about even if they had a great demo, it is long time playability that makes a MMO a winner.
If GW2 is an ultra successful game, then it threatens the future MMO's that plan on being P2P, it will however not disrupt WoW, which will continue on its pace in a P2P model, more than likely the last P2P MMO. The new pricing of B2P will force ActivisionBlizzard to remodel its future MMO's to that formula, and expect them to offer an Item Shop (Crystal Pony/pets/vanity items) because if people will buy that in a P2P model, they will eat it up in a B2P model with higher prices.
Future MMO production will be remodelled with B2P in mind, and there will be fewer blockbuster massive 5 year creation, big budget behemoths.
It's the same model as your typical FPS isn't it? Pay for the software, and the servers are provided free? Of course for FPS many of the servers are done by the community, but some are provided by the publishing company..
Anyway that's fine, but a good subscription model (which is the same as any other service, like phone, internet, cable, various and countless misc services one can get for stuff) is good, re-occurring monthly income that covers bandwidth, server maintenance, and employee costs.. yea.
If this happens, you may be correct. If GW2 can prove that it is feasible and profitable to operate a high-quality, AAA MMO with only box sales and MT, it could change the face of MMO gaming.
But that's a big IF.
so, whats GW2 gonna achieve that a ton of F2P already don't?
How you can charge a box price and sell expansions in addition to running a cash shop?
Honestly with the amount of RMT/cash shops that are popping up all over pay-to-play games these past years, I think it's probably for the best that the subscription model goes away after awhile. For one it'd do us a favor, because right now we're paying monthly, purchasing expansion packs, and at the same time see exclusive items popping up for sale on cash shops.
The old excuses of how pay-to-play games are of higher quality or the such kind of don't apply today. I mean really, just how many high quality pay-to-play games have we seen in the past 3-4 years? The move towards cash shops and f2p is probably inevitable.
If this happens, you may be correct. If GW2 can prove that it is feasible and profitable to operate a high-quality, AAA MMO with only box sales and MT, it could change the face of MMO gaming.
But that's a big IF.
so, whats GW2 gonna achieve that a ton of F2P already don't?
How you can charge a box price and sell expansions in addition to running a cash shop?
What changes is its a bigger company with an existing IP offering content on par with what is on offer in P2P. I really think they can make it happen if they aim for the *urgh* Casual crowd and try to pick up WoW's customers. With WotLK having ICC for one year as its only offering, if they can secure some of the WoW casuals, even on the off hours, they put a serious dent in and future MMO picking up those gamers, as they already have their alternative and they need not pay for a second monthly fee.
Couple that with the last few years of releases that would appear to merely be chasing box sales by releasing a half made product, but marketed with hype and lies, I think that box sales is the new target, not active subs.
There is potential for great change, be it for good or ill, something is clear, the industry is stagnant and rotting and needs something done.
Honestly with the amount of RMT/cash shops that are popping up all over pay-to-play games these past years, I think it's probably for the best that the subscription model goes away after awhile. For one it'd do us a favor, because right now we're paying monthly, purchasing expansion packs, and at the same time see exclusive items popping up for sale on cash shops.
The old excuses of how pay-to-play games are of higher quality or the such kind of don't apply today. I mean really, just how many high quality pay-to-play games have we seen in the past 3-4 years? The move towards cash shops and f2p is probably inevitable.
IMO, a subscription based game is superior to P2P, just because of the payment model.
I will always prefer to pay a monthly fee, rather than buy items in a cash shop.
I will always prefer to play a game that does not have a cash shop, over one that does.
What is probably inevitable is publishers cashing in on all player types.
Why not a subscription server, and a cash shop server?
And again, wait till TOR releases.
if it flops, that may be the death of the subscription based game. But if it's a hit, it's going to make a lot of money.
Well, actually even if TOR flops, that still leaves WoW which is subscription based.
I'd have to say when WOW goes cash shop, THAT would be the end of sub based games.
If this happens, you may be correct. If GW2 can prove that it is feasible and profitable to operate a high-quality, AAA MMO with only box sales and MT, it could change the face of MMO gaming.
But that's a big IF.
so, whats GW2 gonna achieve that a ton of F2P already don't?
How you can charge a box price and sell expansions in addition to running a cash shop?
What changes is its a bigger company with an existing IP offering content on par with what is on offer in P2P. I really think they can make it happen if they aim for the *urgh* Casual crowd and try to pick up WoW's customers. With WotLK having ICC for one year as its only offering, if they can secure some of the WoW casuals, even on the off hours, they put a serious dent in and future MMO picking up those gamers, as they already have their alternative and they need not pay for a second monthly fee.
Couple that with the last few years of releases that would appear to merely be chasing box sales by releasing a half made product, but marketed with hype and lies, I think that box sales is the new target, not active subs.
There is potential for great change, be it for good or ill, something is clear, the industry is stagnant and rotting and needs something done.
A lot of MMORPG fans cut their teeth on WoW. WoW is a subscription based game.
Will that crowd like playing a game with a cash shop after being used to paying 15 bucks a month?
How about after they get tehir first credit card bill after visiting the cash shop?
What about when they reach mid level and don't want to spend money in the cash shop, but everyone buying items and xp postions zooms by them in levels?
I think the payment model itself has an impact on the game, regardless of the quality of the content.
Well, actually even if TOR flops, that still leaves WoW which is subscription based.
I'd have to say when WOW goes cash shop, THAT would be the end of sub based games.
Funny you mentioned WoW, reason for what I posted prior is because WoW is slowly phasing in cash shops. They do it in small increments, by offering exclusive items on cash shops while tying a "charity" to it. SOE at one time also offered very small amount of exclusive items on the cash shops. I think the very fact that WoW did start to add exclusive mounts & pets & card games, it's indication that they are wanting to move towards it.
Now WoW doesn't have to move fast with it, they have plenty of subscribers that they don't need the additional revenue from cash shops to stay afloat. This may not be the case with other games, like SOE games where they haven't seen big growth in population in a long time, they may find a need and want to phase in cash shops faster (like they have).
So my point is whether we pay monthly in a pay-to-play games or not, many p2p games are phasing in cash shops, including WoW. I hate to use WoW as examples because it truly is a beast of its own. There's no other companies in the genre that compares to Blizzard right now, so what they do doesn't exactly mean what other companies can do. So just because WoW have found a way to keep attracting customers after 6 years using a p2p model, doesn't mean other games can do the same.
The sad reality is we really haven't seen many A+ high quality pay-to-play games released in the past few years. There were some high budget P2P games, but many have failed to deliver or at least failed to satisfy the MMO playerbase.
No offense but I would wait to see how GW2 turns out before you crown it king. You might find out you are being ruled by a stillborn.
No crowning . My post says it "MAY" threaten and "IF" it becomes the industry leader. Basically, all I'm saying is that IF GW2 wins the market, then the subscription model is dead. Or at least the two part payment subscription model (buy game, then pay subscription fee).
Sorry, so much GW2 love has clouded my brain. I think it will be successful but it won't beat WoW. As lon as WoW is king subscription will still rule.
Agreed, the leader sets the rules after all .
All I can hope for is that GW2 focuses on making the player base happy instead of chasing WoWs tail. Too many games start off chasing instead of building. That is the only way any game will ever unseat the dark lord, and I have yet to see such a challenger.
Lotro didn't change anyting, it was Runescape, Free Realms, Club Penguin and GW1 that changed the industry. Without their CONTINUED success, Lotro wouldn't have changed to F2P. GW2 will just continue and reinforce the trend if it becomes successful. Even if it doesn't get more sales than all the WoW expansions put together, it will still be seen as the successful anomaly and many will want to ape that success if it becomes that great.
I believe Arenanet knows the world has its eyes on them and they will have to impress for success.
What Turbine did was to prove to the rest of the industry that a AAA title could be profitable... actually more profitable as a F2P game than with the subscription model. GW1 changed absolutely nothing as they are just using a model that FPS's have been using for years before that. Turbine introduced the multi-level payment model to the AAA MMO industry and proved that it could be successful. Sure Runescape used a similar model before that but it has never been considered a AAA MMO. Turbine was really the first to bring all of the current payment models together into one neat little package. I may not care for their games but I have to give credit where credit is due. They are changing the MMO genre as we speak.
Bren
Edit: Actually you'd have to give the B2P credit to Blizzard where RPGs are concerned. Diablo used this model years before GW was ever thought of.
I completely agree. Before LotRO went f2p (mostly) I was still in the camp that thought f2p could mean fun but for high quality you payed a sub. Turbine has completely changed the game, at least for me, and now I know that I would rather own a game than rent it.
When I found out Rift was going to be P2P my interest went from very high to very low, as I think it will for many people. Why? I'm locked into a sub for WoW. Would have dropped it by now except I play with my brother and his family once per week and they won't play another game. I have spent $50 on DDO for a year's play, $30 on LotRO since September (and won't be spending more any time soon) and I really like these games. I also enjoy RoM so if I ever get sick of DDO, LotRO, and WoW I know I can get hours of enjoyment out of RoM for free, hours more out of PWI for free, and can purchase GW2 and play it for free. Even if Rift is fantastic, why would I want to pay another subscription when I have so many free options that could carry me through the next year or two?
GW2 will be another nail in the coffin of sub based games, but Turbine was the company that changed everything.
I was pleasantly surprised when I went from Apprentice to full 5 star Elite in under 2 months. I was pleasantly surprised again when I went from Elite to just barely Hardcore in 2 weeks. Apprentice, here I come!
If WoW ever went f2p with a cash shop it would be mind boggling the number of extra players they could pick up. They do have some cash shop items but those items for charity should not be included anything done in the name of charity in my book cannot be considered in the same vein.
If this happens, you may be correct. If GW2 can prove that it is feasible and profitable to operate a high-quality, AAA MMO with only box sales and MT, it could change the face of MMO gaming.
But that's a big IF.
so, whats GW2 gonna achieve that a ton of F2P already don't?
How you can charge a box price and sell expansions in addition to running a cash shop?
What changes is its a bigger company with an existing IP offering content on par with what is on offer in P2P. I really think they can make it happen if they aim for the *urgh* Casual crowd and try to pick up WoW's customers. With WotLK having ICC for one year as its only offering, if they can secure some of the WoW casuals, even on the off hours, they put a serious dent in and future MMO picking up those gamers, as they already have their alternative and they need not pay for a second monthly fee.
Couple that with the last few years of releases that would appear to merely be chasing box sales by releasing a half made product, but marketed with hype and lies, I think that box sales is the new target, not active subs.
There is potential for great change, be it for good or ill, something is clear, the industry is stagnant and rotting and needs something done.
A lot of MMORPG fans cut their teeth on WoW. WoW is a subscription based game.
Will that crowd like playing a game with a cash shop after being used to paying 15 bucks a month?
How about after they get tehir first credit card bill after visiting the cash shop?
What about when they reach mid level and don't want to spend money in the cash shop, but everyone buying items and xp postions zooms by them in levels?
I think the payment model itself has an impact on the game, regardless of the quality of the content.
Shit, I thought GW2 was B2P not Pay2Win. No has want for item shop like that, however vanity items like in WoWs item shop, with the mount that people buy to get abused by others, or the vanity pets im okay with.
Payment model does have impact on the game, I was just thinking that the P2P model when looking at WoW is a massive profit making exercise, but when you look at MMO's that do not have the subscription base (Read: Every other MMO) then a different system might necessitate being employed, like DDO or LOTRO. WoW is a once in a lifetime phenominon, and gmae companies need to stop trying to emulate that formula (I hope that they may be beginning to learn this) and instead refocus on the market that is not beign serviced by WoW and find a way to profit from there.
If there is to be a change in payment methodology away from P2P, as long as it does not push it towards Item shops with Pay2Win, I wont mind one bit. As long as its vanity items that dont change gameplay one bit (like WoW's shop) then its fine with me, race change, sex change, name change, vanity pets, hair dye, if people will buy it but it does not change the game experience or offer any kind of progression or PvP advantage.
If GW2 becomes the dominant MMORPG I am fairly convinced that it will destroy the subscription based model. Here's why...
GW1, while successful, was not really an MMORPG as most of us think about it. The key differentiation was the fact that it did not have a persistent world. GW1 was more like an online coop and PvP RPG than an MMORPG.
GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG. It has a persistent world, not all instanced, etc. etc. So this really puts it more in direct competition with MMORPGs like WoW and LOTR.
So now let's consider the possibility that GW2 turns out to be great and becomes the industry leader. Many people will argue that players will play GW2, but still retain their subscriptions to other games, as such it won't have much of an impact. I disagree with this. While it is true that some truly hardcore players may play two MMORPGs at once, most of us simply don't have enough time for that. We will pick our MMORPG and stick to it.
That said, if GW2 becomes the industry leader, then most other MMORPGs released will likely be inferior to GW2 much like most MMORPGs released nowadays are inferior to WoW. How could these MMORPGs possibly compete with GW2 charging a subscription when the industry leader does not? It's not possible, no one is going to buy a subpar product that is more expensive than the industry leader. They will be forced to be F2P or B2P, no other options.
So in conclusion, what I think makes GW2 dangerous is that it is bargain priced AND it looks like it will be a quality product. All imitators MUST be priced below or equal to the industry leader to have a hope of succeeding. I don't see how the subscription model will survive (except for maybe in very small niches) if GW2 becomes the industry leader.
Sounds like you don't like Walmart..fast food value meals.....and lower taxes either.
If GW2 becomes the dominant MMORPG I am fairly convinced that it will destroy the subscription based model. Here's why...
GW1, while successful, was not really an MMORPG as most of us think about it. The key differentiation was the fact that it did not have a persistent world. GW1 was more like an online coop and PvP RPG than an MMORPG.
GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG. It has a persistent world, not all instanced, etc. etc. So this really puts it more in direct competition with MMORPGs like WoW and LOTR.
So now let's consider the possibility that GW2 turns out to be great and becomes the industry leader. Many people will argue that players will play GW2, but still retain their subscriptions to other games, as such it won't have much of an impact. I disagree with this. While it is true that some truly hardcore players may play two MMORPGs at once, most of us simply don't have enough time for that. We will pick our MMORPG and stick to it.
That said, if GW2 becomes the industry leader, then most other MMORPGs released will likely be inferior to GW2 much like most MMORPGs released nowadays are inferior to WoW. How could these MMORPGs possibly compete with GW2 charging a subscription when the industry leader does not? It's not possible, no one is going to buy a subpar product that is more expensive than the industry leader. They will be forced to be F2P or B2P, no other options.
So in conclusion, what I think makes GW2 dangerous is that it is bargain priced AND it looks like it will be a quality product. All imitators MUST be priced below or equal to the industry leader to have a hope of succeeding. I don't see how the subscription model will survive (except for maybe in very small niches) if GW2 becomes the industry leader.
One word: good.
It's been argued in some real way by both ArenaNet and players that the money companies take in with the subscription model is either too much, isn't utilised in a way that makes the subscription price understandable, or both. Arguing that people pay more money to go see a movie or two in the theatre is irrelevant because it isn't a comparable product, it's a different hobby altogether. The question is 'is a subscription model still necessary or even fair?'
If Guild Wars 2 can become a success without a subscription price attached to it it will prove one thing resoundingly: the subscription model is no longer necessary and, looking at All Points Bulletin, Mortal Online and Final Fantasy XIV, is hardly fair.
A final point. Guild Wars 2 will not be bargain priced, it will likely cost $49.99-59.99 for the box. That is not a bargain, that is a retail standard.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain. (2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
If GW2 becomes the dominant MMORPG I am fairly convinced that it will destroy the subscription based model. Here's why...
GW1, while successful, was not really an MMORPG as most of us think about it. The key differentiation was the fact that it did not have a persistent world. GW1 was more like an online coop and PvP RPG than an MMORPG.
GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG. It has a persistent world, not all instanced, etc. etc. So this really puts it more in direct competition with MMORPGs like WoW and LOTR.
So now let's consider the possibility that GW2 turns out to be great and becomes the industry leader. Many people will argue that players will play GW2, but still retain their subscriptions to other games, as such it won't have much of an impact. I disagree with this. While it is true that some truly hardcore players may play two MMORPGs at once, most of us simply don't have enough time for that. We will pick our MMORPG and stick to it.
That said, if GW2 becomes the industry leader, then most other MMORPGs released will likely be inferior to GW2 much like most MMORPGs released nowadays are inferior to WoW. How could these MMORPGs possibly compete with GW2 charging a subscription when the industry leader does not? It's not possible, no one is going to buy a subpar product that is more expensive than the industry leader. They will be forced to be F2P or B2P, no other options.
So in conclusion, what I think makes GW2 dangerous is that it is bargain priced AND it looks like it will be a quality product. All imitators MUST be priced below or equal to the industry leader to have a hope of succeeding. I don't see how the subscription model will survive (except for maybe in very small niches) if GW2 becomes the industry leader.
Go to the blackboard and write 1000 times: "Now I know what capitalism is"
P.S. You should also look into "competition", "free market", and why 2 products with similar markets fight to get better.
Way to much speculation for a game that doesn't even have a release date. I've made this point before, and i'll do it again. GW1 apparently had 5-6 million box sales, find the figure of how many box sales WoW has and i'm sure you'll realize that its probably at least 5 or 6 times the amount.
Regardless, WoW has proven that if you make a quality game that makes it WORTH it to subscribe monthly than the game will be a success. Saying that DDO and LOTRO made better revenues because they went F2P is just saying that the game wasn't worth it to a player to pay for a subscription.
IMO to me anyways it signals that GW2 will probably not be a game that you can play on a constant basis, if they made the game at such quality that it could merit monthly subscription than it would. GW1 was an ok game, I played it, but would i pay for a monthly subscription for that game? Hell no! Would i pay a monthly subscription for diablo? Hello no. Pretty much the same could be said about any f2p game, and thats why they have that model.
8.6 million retail sales of WoW, including all expansions.... Seems like your figures are WAY off. What you're forgetting is that only 4.5 million people in the US and Europe had to buy WoW to play it. The bulk of the players are in Asia, where they don't buy the game, and they pay for time in the game. Which also makes WoW's claims of 12million subscriptions kinda bullshit.
I had to look this article up as something seemed off, and sure enough it was U.S. sales, not worldwide or including the EU. Here is the quote indicating that it was the U.S. "No information on average sale price across all versions was provided. But presuming $30 for each unit sold (the core game currently retails at $19.95; expansion packs and compilations for as much as $39.95), it amounts to as much as $258 million total from U.S. retail alone."
It has been stated in various other threads and news info that WoW has higher subscribers in the EU than the U.S. so it is likely that the 8.6 million figure is at least the same in the EU indicating that the total would be around 17 million for all three add to that trial accounts that get electronically upgraded and not bought in the stores and you have even more.
Also I may be wrong about the EU having greater subs than U.S. and if I am my appologies.
If GW2 becomes the dominant MMORPG I am fairly convinced that it will destroy the subscription based model. Here's why...
GW1, while successful, was not really an MMORPG as most of us think about it. The key differentiation was the fact that it did not have a persistent world. GW1 was more like an online coop and PvP RPG than an MMORPG.
GW2 however, is much more in line with what we traditionally think of as an MMORPG. It has a persistent world, not all instanced, etc. etc. So this really puts it more in direct competition with MMORPGs like WoW and LOTR.
So now let's consider the possibility that GW2 turns out to be great and becomes the industry leader. Many people will argue that players will play GW2, but still retain their subscriptions to other games, as such it won't have much of an impact. I disagree with this. While it is true that some truly hardcore players may play two MMORPGs at once, most of us simply don't have enough time for that. We will pick our MMORPG and stick to it.
That said, if GW2 becomes the industry leader, then most other MMORPGs released will likely be inferior to GW2 much like most MMORPGs released nowadays are inferior to WoW. How could these MMORPGs possibly compete with GW2 charging a subscription when the industry leader does not? It's not possible, no one is going to buy a subpar product that is more expensive than the industry leader. They will be forced to be F2P or B2P, no other options.
So in conclusion, what I think makes GW2 dangerous is that it is bargain priced AND it looks like it will be a quality product. All imitators MUST be priced below or equal to the industry leader to have a hope of succeeding. I don't see how the subscription model will survive (except for maybe in very small niches) if GW2 becomes the industry leader.
Go to the blackboard and write 1000 times: "Now I know what capitalism is"
P.S. You should also look into "competition", "free market", and why 2 products with similar markets fight to get better.
I was trying to be subtle with my post.you said it all :-)
Originally posted by wisesquirrel Do not let yourself be governed by hype, sure they act like the pro and mature developers now, but we can only judge their game by the finished product. Plus, GW2 and WoW might actually be able to live side by side (One is subscription and the other is buy to play, it is feasible). Now, if apples were the dominant MMORPG... (Couldn't help myself )
Um, the are mature professional developers. These are the people that made Battle.net. We have years of finished product to judge from. And for that matter, GW1 was more polished even than DDO or Lotro, which started their lives as subscription games, and DDO plays essentially like GW1 in any case.
They were not going for the MMO mainstream market with GW1, because they did not have the funds. Unsurprisingly, GW1 made them money, and is continuing to make them money. We should not let ourselves be governed by hype, but some hype is deserved, especially when we can see what they have already done, and can see it bests games from development houses that started with more money.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
It is very much a wait and see how muchl the games sells but clearly it is going to be the best mmo on the market when it releases. ArenaNet does not release craptastic stuff so I'm not worried at all saying this.
Comments
What Turbine did was to prove to the rest of the industry that a AAA title could be profitable... actually more profitable as a F2P game than with the subscription model. GW1 changed absolutely nothing as they are just using a model that FPS's have been using for years before that. Turbine introduced the multi-level payment model to the AAA MMO industry and proved that it could be successful. Sure Runescape used a similar model before that but it has never been considered a AAA MMO. Turbine was really the first to bring all of the current payment models together into one neat little package. I may not care for their games but I have to give credit where credit is due. They are changing the MMO genre as we speak.
Bren
Edit: Actually you'd have to give the B2P credit to Blizzard where RPGs are concerned. Diablo used this model years before GW was ever thought of.
while(horse==dead)
{
beat();
}
I've read the reviews of several different people who played the demo, they disagree with you. They believe that GW2 plays nothing like GW1, they believe it's a bigger game and yes it also looks like a more expensive one. Now let me tell you something that WE know; NCsoft is the publisher, they are a rich company with many investors and one of their most successful properties is GW1. They've seen the hype for GW2 and (if you look closely) have taken some of the ideas in GW2 and put it in their other games like B&S (situational skills and Downed skills (@ 7:30) anyone?). And you also know that even to this day, GW1 is being updated with new content that is totally free e.g; War in Kryta, Hearts of the North, Conflict in Cantha (Coming soon). So you can't claim that only a sub can deliver that, you just have to look at what Anet has done with GW1 to know that they can deliver.
This is not a game.
I might be off the mark compeltely here, but I am sure I read in an interview waaay back when GW2 was announced, that they are moving away from a the buy2play model and thinking of adopting the normal subscription based model or some sort of hybrid....
maybe my brain playing trick os me so forgive me if i'm wrong...
*scratch that, just checked the FAQ on the official site - no subscription fee...
Agreed. And no complaints from me. There was a good reason for monthly fees when Meridian 59 released, bandwidth were really expensive then. Today are we paying mostly for support and huge profits. Wow would still make a lot of money with 5 bucks a month fees....
It might affect the quality of support we gets if more games start to do like this, but I only used that once during my entire timne as a gamer, once in AoC when a quest bugged. So waiting twice or even 3 times the time for help with that would still be a bargain compared to all money I spent on monthly fees since M59.
I never had anything to complain on in GW and they still patch in enough content, I am currently playing War in Kryta and while it isn't as huge as an expansions is it as large as any other patched in content of a MMO.
Can GW 2 deliver what it should it will change the genre. But that is something we still can't be sure about even if they had a great demo, it is long time playability that makes a MMO a winner.
Prediction.
If GW2 is an ultra successful game, then it threatens the future MMO's that plan on being P2P, it will however not disrupt WoW, which will continue on its pace in a P2P model, more than likely the last P2P MMO. The new pricing of B2P will force ActivisionBlizzard to remodel its future MMO's to that formula, and expect them to offer an Item Shop (Crystal Pony/pets/vanity items) because if people will buy that in a P2P model, they will eat it up in a B2P model with higher prices.
Future MMO production will be remodelled with B2P in mind, and there will be fewer blockbuster massive 5 year creation, big budget behemoths.
It's the same model as your typical FPS isn't it? Pay for the software, and the servers are provided free? Of course for FPS many of the servers are done by the community, but some are provided by the publishing company..
Anyway that's fine, but a good subscription model (which is the same as any other service, like phone, internet, cable, various and countless misc services one can get for stuff) is good, re-occurring monthly income that covers bandwidth, server maintenance, and employee costs.. yea.
so, whats GW2 gonna achieve that a ton of F2P already don't?
How you can charge a box price and sell expansions in addition to running a cash shop?
Honestly with the amount of RMT/cash shops that are popping up all over pay-to-play games these past years, I think it's probably for the best that the subscription model goes away after awhile. For one it'd do us a favor, because right now we're paying monthly, purchasing expansion packs, and at the same time see exclusive items popping up for sale on cash shops.
The old excuses of how pay-to-play games are of higher quality or the such kind of don't apply today. I mean really, just how many high quality pay-to-play games have we seen in the past 3-4 years? The move towards cash shops and f2p is probably inevitable.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
What changes is its a bigger company with an existing IP offering content on par with what is on offer in P2P. I really think they can make it happen if they aim for the *urgh* Casual crowd and try to pick up WoW's customers. With WotLK having ICC for one year as its only offering, if they can secure some of the WoW casuals, even on the off hours, they put a serious dent in and future MMO picking up those gamers, as they already have their alternative and they need not pay for a second monthly fee.
Couple that with the last few years of releases that would appear to merely be chasing box sales by releasing a half made product, but marketed with hype and lies, I think that box sales is the new target, not active subs.
There is potential for great change, be it for good or ill, something is clear, the industry is stagnant and rotting and needs something done.
IMO, a subscription based game is superior to P2P, just because of the payment model.
I will always prefer to pay a monthly fee, rather than buy items in a cash shop.
I will always prefer to play a game that does not have a cash shop, over one that does.
What is probably inevitable is publishers cashing in on all player types.
Why not a subscription server, and a cash shop server?
And again, wait till TOR releases.
if it flops, that may be the death of the subscription based game. But if it's a hit, it's going to make a lot of money.
Well, actually even if TOR flops, that still leaves WoW which is subscription based.
I'd have to say when WOW goes cash shop, THAT would be the end of sub based games.
A lot of MMORPG fans cut their teeth on WoW. WoW is a subscription based game.
Will that crowd like playing a game with a cash shop after being used to paying 15 bucks a month?
How about after they get tehir first credit card bill after visiting the cash shop?
What about when they reach mid level and don't want to spend money in the cash shop, but everyone buying items and xp postions zooms by them in levels?
I think the payment model itself has an impact on the game, regardless of the quality of the content.
Funny you mentioned WoW, reason for what I posted prior is because WoW is slowly phasing in cash shops. They do it in small increments, by offering exclusive items on cash shops while tying a "charity" to it. SOE at one time also offered very small amount of exclusive items on the cash shops. I think the very fact that WoW did start to add exclusive mounts & pets & card games, it's indication that they are wanting to move towards it.
Now WoW doesn't have to move fast with it, they have plenty of subscribers that they don't need the additional revenue from cash shops to stay afloat. This may not be the case with other games, like SOE games where they haven't seen big growth in population in a long time, they may find a need and want to phase in cash shops faster (like they have).
So my point is whether we pay monthly in a pay-to-play games or not, many p2p games are phasing in cash shops, including WoW. I hate to use WoW as examples because it truly is a beast of its own. There's no other companies in the genre that compares to Blizzard right now, so what they do doesn't exactly mean what other companies can do. So just because WoW have found a way to keep attracting customers after 6 years using a p2p model, doesn't mean other games can do the same.
The sad reality is we really haven't seen many A+ high quality pay-to-play games released in the past few years. There were some high budget P2P games, but many have failed to deliver or at least failed to satisfy the MMO playerbase.
EQ1-AC1-DAOC-FFXI-L2-EQ2-WoW-DDO-GW-LoTR-VG-WAR-GW2-ESO
All I can hope for is that GW2 focuses on making the player base happy instead of chasing WoWs tail. Too many games start off chasing instead of building. That is the only way any game will ever unseat the dark lord, and I have yet to see such a challenger.
I completely agree. Before LotRO went f2p (mostly) I was still in the camp that thought f2p could mean fun but for high quality you payed a sub. Turbine has completely changed the game, at least for me, and now I know that I would rather own a game than rent it.
When I found out Rift was going to be P2P my interest went from very high to very low, as I think it will for many people. Why? I'm locked into a sub for WoW. Would have dropped it by now except I play with my brother and his family once per week and they won't play another game. I have spent $50 on DDO for a year's play, $30 on LotRO since September (and won't be spending more any time soon) and I really like these games. I also enjoy RoM so if I ever get sick of DDO, LotRO, and WoW I know I can get hours of enjoyment out of RoM for free, hours more out of PWI for free, and can purchase GW2 and play it for free. Even if Rift is fantastic, why would I want to pay another subscription when I have so many free options that could carry me through the next year or two?
GW2 will be another nail in the coffin of sub based games, but Turbine was the company that changed everything.
I was pleasantly surprised when I went from Apprentice to full 5 star Elite in under 2 months. I was pleasantly surprised again when I went from Elite to just barely Hardcore in 2 weeks. Apprentice, here I come!
If WoW ever went f2p with a cash shop it would be mind boggling the number of extra players they could pick up. They do have some cash shop items but those items for charity should not be included anything done in the name of charity in my book cannot be considered in the same vein.
Shit, I thought GW2 was B2P not Pay2Win. No has want for item shop like that, however vanity items like in WoWs item shop, with the mount that people buy to get abused by others, or the vanity pets im okay with.
Payment model does have impact on the game, I was just thinking that the P2P model when looking at WoW is a massive profit making exercise, but when you look at MMO's that do not have the subscription base (Read: Every other MMO) then a different system might necessitate being employed, like DDO or LOTRO. WoW is a once in a lifetime phenominon, and gmae companies need to stop trying to emulate that formula (I hope that they may be beginning to learn this) and instead refocus on the market that is not beign serviced by WoW and find a way to profit from there.
If there is to be a change in payment methodology away from P2P, as long as it does not push it towards Item shops with Pay2Win, I wont mind one bit. As long as its vanity items that dont change gameplay one bit (like WoW's shop) then its fine with me, race change, sex change, name change, vanity pets, hair dye, if people will buy it but it does not change the game experience or offer any kind of progression or PvP advantage.
One word: good.
It's been argued in some real way by both ArenaNet and players that the money companies take in with the subscription model is either too much, isn't utilised in a way that makes the subscription price understandable, or both. Arguing that people pay more money to go see a movie or two in the theatre is irrelevant because it isn't a comparable product, it's a different hobby altogether. The question is 'is a subscription model still necessary or even fair?'
If Guild Wars 2 can become a success without a subscription price attached to it it will prove one thing resoundingly: the subscription model is no longer necessary and, looking at All Points Bulletin, Mortal Online and Final Fantasy XIV, is hardly fair.
A final point. Guild Wars 2 will not be bargain priced, it will likely cost $49.99-59.99 for the box. That is not a bargain, that is a retail standard.
(1)TL:DR must be your way of saying that thinking hurts. Then again, this may explain why it looks like you responded to the post without using your brain.
(2) It's not about community, is it? You just have nothing better to do.
Go to the blackboard and write 1000 times: "Now I know what capitalism is"
P.S. You should also look into "competition", "free market", and why 2 products with similar markets fight to get better.
There is one thing I hate more than paying a subscription and that is being nagged to buy something every time I turn around. F2P can suck it.
I had to look this article up as something seemed off, and sure enough it was U.S. sales, not worldwide or including the EU. Here is the quote indicating that it was the U.S. "No information on average sale price across all versions was provided. But presuming $30 for each unit sold (the core game currently retails at $19.95; expansion packs and compilations for as much as $39.95), it amounts to as much as $258 million total from U.S. retail alone."
It has been stated in various other threads and news info that WoW has higher subscribers in the EU than the U.S. so it is likely that the 8.6 million figure is at least the same in the EU indicating that the total would be around 17 million for all three add to that trial accounts that get electronically upgraded and not bought in the stores and you have even more.
Also I may be wrong about the EU having greater subs than U.S. and if I am my appologies.
Does online factor in for WoW in that gamesutra stat ? I bought mine online.
Um, the are mature professional developers. These are the people that made Battle.net. We have years of finished product to judge from. And for that matter, GW1 was more polished even than DDO or Lotro, which started their lives as subscription games, and DDO plays essentially like GW1 in any case.
They were not going for the MMO mainstream market with GW1, because they did not have the funds. Unsurprisingly, GW1 made them money, and is continuing to make them money. We should not let ourselves be governed by hype, but some hype is deserved, especially when we can see what they have already done, and can see it bests games from development houses that started with more money.
"Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true you know it, and they know it." Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007
WTF? No subscription fee?
It is very much a wait and see how muchl the games sells but clearly it is going to be the best mmo on the market when it releases. ArenaNet does not release craptastic stuff so I'm not worried at all saying this.