I find most new MMOs to be shallow, and would not play them if they were fp with no cash shop, or they gave me unlimited cash in their cash shop.
I think Trion is a good company, but I left Rift with like 3 months still paid, it was just too railed, small, and they did not do a good job on the harvesting/crafting. They do a good job of executing their vision for the game, but the daily checklist thing just doesn't excite me to do it.
GW2 looked like it would be good on paper, but I had never played something that seemed so, not sure, the classes seemed dull, did not like their take on non-trinity, I still can't nail down why, but I didn't last long in it...
TOR - I played for a month, knew it wouldn't be a mmo I stayed in long, but had friends playing, got my money worth in the month, but I was done after that, and would not of kept playing if it was f2p after the free month, before actually being f2p with cash shop.
TSW - Actually liked, just suffered the themepark problem of content being used up quick, despite it not having a good harvest/crafting system, which is usually a no go for me. I just thought the quest/story stuff was different and interesting, and I am not a big story person.
Newer mmos seem designed for the game jumper, and prior to Rift, I had never stayed in a MMO less than a year, and many 6-8 years total (UO/EQ). I prefer a sub model myself, I like to know what I am paying, think people having to pay a sub also gives the developers better control over the world and crap people pull, if you can just make a new account and it is free, good luck policing your world. Some f2p models aren't bad, but some feel like someone is trying to milk every dime out of you they can (which I guess they should, but, it puts me off).
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
Scott should know better.
Fix the game, not the revenue model. Don't cave into the 'fact' of uninvested transient playerbases without looking at the correct problem.
The problem is that users don't stay as they used to.
Some say the reason for this problem is that the games aren't as good as they used to be.
Some think the problem is in the oversaturation of the market - more choice means less commitment.
I think it is both.
But I think an important un-stated issue is that game companies don't care if we stick around. They would take higher profits from transient gamers on a f2p model over smaller profits from long-term sub games.
We have to remember that the motivation of game companies is to maximize profit, not create a game which creates longterm players.
In this climate, max profits come from f2p game hoppers. What we can pray for is someone who figures out how to make a game we will not only play for years, but also gives them bigger profits than the current climate.
You really believe that companies will spend upwards of $100+ milion and not plan to keep players longterm? so why are companies being forced to change tac? Blizzard strangled the market for years if it had competition sub fee's would have risen with the cost of development but you cannot compete in a virtual monopoly so you have to do something else free2play and freemium is that something else. Trying to come out with new concepts is too risky with that much money involved you usually only see that in fledgling markets not mature ones. Players expect high quality graphics, innovative systems, loads of classes or skills, indepth crafting, moldable terrain, massive PvP battles, intricate dungeons and boss fights the list goes on, this costs millions and multiple years of investment without seeing a return, you willing to put your money where you mouth is? now do you still think companies don't plan longterm?
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Of course according to a businessman like SH the future has to be a different model to get money out of the players, aka F2P +cash shop. That's his vision of the future of mmorps.
Now ask a gamer about it. He will tell you that the future of mmorpgs rather has to look like this:
-open world instead of a lobby (capitol city) + instances
-character progression instead of gear progression
-player driven economy instead of item shops
-free choice of skill progression instead of set class templates
-crafting as meaningful as combat
-player driven content instead of "kill 10 rats"
-agriculture, stock breeding instead of pokemons
-terraforming, open world housing and settling instead of instanced guild halls
-etc.
Otherwise, there is no future for mmorpgs. No matter what sub, freemium, platinum, f2p, vip, etc. model the suits come up with.
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
Scott should know better.
Fix the game, not the revenue model. Don't cave into the 'fact' of uninvested transient playerbases without looking at the correct problem.
The problem is that users don't stay as they used to.
Some say the reason for this problem is that the games aren't as good as they used to be.
Some think the problem is in the oversaturation of the market - more choice means less commitment.
I think it is both.
But I think an important un-stated issue is that game companies don't care if we stick around. They would take higher profits from transient gamers on a f2p model over smaller profits from long-term sub games.
We have to remember that the motivation of game companies is to maximize profit, not create a game which creates longterm players.
In this climate, max profits come from f2p game hoppers. What we can pray for is someone who figures out how to make a game we will not only play for years, but also gives them bigger profits than the current climate.
You really believe that companies will spend upwards of $100+ milion and not plan to keep players longterm? so why are companies being forced to change tac? Blizzard strangled the market for years if it had competition sub fee's would have risen with the cost of development but you cannot compete in a virtual monopoly so you have to do something else free2play and freemium is that something else. Trying to come out with new concepts is too risky with that much money involved you usually only see that in fledgling markets not mature ones. Players expect high quality graphics, innovative systems, loads of classes or skills, indepth crafting, moldable terrain, massive PvP battles, intricate dungeons and boss fights the list goes on, this costs millions and multiple years of investment without seeing a return, you willing to put your money where you mouth is? now do you still think companies don't plan longterm?
Yes, people want to be safe with their money, but being safe limits losses, and as has been generally showen lately, seems to be limiting gains also. WoW with a twist hasn't been making too many people rich in the last 6-8 years either. I kind of view it like moneyball or something, I am sure they have a formula....If I add housing, how mnay people actually will stay or play because of it, if I have a player economy with indepth crafting/player economy, same thing... They min/max. The player that enjoys depth as I usually call it is a minority, verse the player that wants to just kill things and not bother with crafting, a house and harvesting. So you generally get the 'depth' tacked on, and it is not good, but enough to say you have it, ala WAR, that had to be the worse crafting thrown into a game I had ever seen at launch.
So I agree, people want to keep their customers, but they also want to minimize what they spend and the risks,. TOR spent a lot of money, and dared to be different, I don't think it worked out for them too much, but they did try. I think the next big MMO will be someone that dared to try, most likely, verse one playing it safe.
That is an interesting, if not short, interview. Scott has been pretty strongly and vocally opposed to the sub-free model in the past. I'm curious what shifted his perspective to a more open view.
The one thing I would say to him, if I could, would be: Sub-locked revenue models don't work for me anymore because I don't want to rent temporary access to my games any longer.
This is still my hobby. I still spend an average of $10 - $30 per month on it. However, because it is my hobby, I don't want to lose access to all I've created, all the time I've spent, and all the money I've invested in it just because I'm not ponying up a recurring fee.
I still subscribe to games. I'm subbed to Tera right now because the sub offers me some nice perks and when I drop it I can still access and enjoy all that I've put into it.
One really bitter and disappointing point in Rift, for me, was after I had committed to an annual subscription, I found out their expansion was going to be extra. So now I'm paying monthly for a game, and then I have to pay more to access the current content. Not only that, but if I don't buy the content I'm left behind. It felt like a double gouge. It was then I realized that I'm just renting all this anyway and if I don't keep paying, plus spending more on the extras, that all I've put into it is flushed.
If he becomes active in developing another MMO I hope he applies his new perspective to that game.
The sub-based model is for a perpetual game experience. That's why it works, is worth the money, and people are more than willing to go for it.
MMOs take (or should take) significantly longer to develop than a single player game. It is much more intensive. It has much higher upkeep. The sub spreads the upfront cost over time and covers upkeep.
The problem right now is with the developers who are making games with a single player mindset. SWTOR is a great example of this. It is a fantastic solo game. It's MMO features are lacking. If you buy the box and sub, it's essentially turning into a $120.00ish single player game. That's not appealing. The growing trend by developers is to take the massive out of MMO. It's destroying the genre and leaving most gamers with a bad taste in their mouth. It isn't an issue of Sandbox vs. Themepark (the difference between the two is typically greatly exaggerated). It's an issue of quality vs. garbage. If a game can be churned through in 3ish months, it's garbage.
the reason people quit games and do not commit to them is they are all easy mode games nowadays where you get everything handed to you on a silver platter . If you take away the challenge in games and allow everyone to have everything with no effort people leave because they get bored. Carrot on a stick games like DAOC and EQ that required you to work hard to achieve your goals people stuck with for years. Devs nowadays do not get it , you have to force group people to make them be social and you make rewards hard to achieve so people feel a sense of accomplishment. Instead they listen to the whiny vocal minority about how everything is to hard or time consuming and nurf things into the ground.
The most social game ive ever played in my life was DAOC , because it took you a month or longer to reach max level and another 3 months to get to a respectable realm rank and you did all this by having to look for groups before dungeon finders were made etc. You were forced to make friends in your realm and you built up bonds there with those same people that lasted years. I cannot even name one person ive met in recent games I still talk to as a friend , yet my old DAOC friends I still talk to on facebook to this day .
It's easy to stay in games for years when there was only 3 or 4 to choose from. Now a new game comes out every few months and gamers like jumping games.
Ppl make excuses as to why they do it but even if they made " great " games like they once did...ppl would still game hop.
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
Scott should know better.
Fix the game, not the revenue model. Don't cave into the 'fact' of uninvested transient playerbases without looking at the correct problem.
What problem?
The problem, amongst other things, of designing single play through story led themeparks and expecting them to hold the majority of folks once they were 'done' in a saturated market.
Thats perception, as I said in another post there are many players sticking with modern MMOs so they have a completely different perception. I have guildies in SWTOR who have been playing from headstart, thats 18 months in agame slated for being "single player" and they definitely don't see it that way, I played fror 7 months and stopped at the annoucement of f2p and my finances crumbled, I've met players who have played LoTRO for multiple years, I know players that have played Runes Of Magic, Rift, Jade Dynasty, Rappelz, Champions Online, Age Of Conan, EQ2, Perfect World, there are even vets of Darkfall believe or not, the list goes on and on and a few of them have been labeled single player or shallow Asian grinders.
The choice in the marketplace today is massive compared to yesteryear and this notion that any game can release in this market and grow is a fanciful one unless it starts out with a minium of players like EvE online. Just because you and many others around here don't like modern MMO's and cannot stick to one is your problem because many others do, its just they are spread thinly around many different games. I don't see a problem, its a competitive market and only the good games will survive the long haul just like all other competitive markets.
What convincing argument can you put forth to convince me that games that are fine, and that players have poor ability to test the satisfaction level of the games they play? You are taking a position that is at the least counter-productive, and more likely to just be an exercise in sophistry.
Games are not bad because the audience is bad
The audience is bad because they have bad habits from old games
You really believe that companies will spend upwards of $100+ milion and not plan to keep players longterm? so why are companies being forced to change tac? Blizzard strangled the market for years if it had competition sub fee's would have risen with the cost of development but you cannot compete in a virtual monopoly so you have to do something else free2play and freemium is that something else. Trying to come out with new concepts is too risky with that much money involved you usually only see that in fledgling markets not mature ones. Players expect high quality graphics, innovative systems, loads of classes or skills, indepth crafting, moldable terrain, massive PvP battles, intricate dungeons and boss fights the list goes on, this costs millions and multiple years of investment without seeing a return, you willing to put your money where you mouth is? now do you still think companies don't plan longterm?
Yes, people want to be safe with their money, but being safe limits losses, and as has been generally showen lately, seems to be limiting gains also. WoW with a twist hasn't been making too many people rich in the last 6-8 years either. I kind of view it like moneyball or something, I am sure they have a formula....If I add housing, how mnay people actually will stay or play because of it, if I have a player economy with indepth crafting/player economy, same thing... They min/max. The player that enjoys depth as I usually call it is a minority, verse the player that wants to just kill things and not bother with crafting, a house and harvesting. So you generally get the 'depth' tacked on, and it is not good, but enough to say you have it, ala WAR, that had to be the worse crafting thrown into a game I had ever seen at launch.
So I agree, people want to keep their customers, but they also want to minimize what they spend and the risks,. TOR spent a lot of money, and dared to be different, I don't think it worked out for them too much, but they did try. I think the next big MMO will be someone that dared to try, most likely, verse one playing it safe.
Arenanet are having these exact problems now, even though at the core the game is not to dissimilar to other themeparks it tried to shake up many concepts and it struggles to get the playerbase understanding them and balancing their own game so you see a lot of frustration on the GW2 boards. This is a prime example of trying to push the envelope, players are not patient anymore if it doesn't work perfectly out of the box they just throw their toys out of the pram or just leave and we wonder why companies stick to tried and tested concepts and maybe add a twist.
Arenanet caved in when the progression boys moaned about no progression and in doing so pissed off the GW franchise fans. Doing new innovative things is a massive risk, will it pay off for Arenanet? I don't know, GW2 will probably end up in the same situation as GW1 a respected niche MMO and that is being watched by other developers I'm sure. Sometimes we the playerbase have to take so responsibility and stick by companies that attempt to shake things up and be patient, these games are massive undertakings and complex entities, we have to stop acting like spoilt children.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
What convincing argument can you put forth to convince me that games that are fine, and that players have poor ability to test the satisfaction level of the games they play? You are taking a position that is at the least counter-productive, and more likely to just be an exercise in sophistry.
Games are not bad because the audience is bad
The audience is bad because they have bad habits from old games
therefore only new audience is good
Where are you going with this?
The first words of the post should answer your questions, "that's perception" you perceive MMO's to have problems others don't including me, so I don't have to convince you of anything. I see for me longevity in SW:TOR, GW2 and Tera the games I've played or play in the past year with no less depth than games of yore, can you convince me I'm wrong? is there any point? its all just opinion.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
Thats just it...i dont find the p2p games as being any better than the free games so why spend the money??.....Also Rift was a WoW copy (wont even call it a clone) and it felt like I'd been there and done that before I even reached level 10 in it........I was surprised players stayed in Rift as long as they did.
One really bitter and disappointing point in Rift, for me, was after I had committed to an annual subscription, I found out their expansion was going to be extra. So now I'm paying monthly for a game, and then I have to pay more to access the current content. Not only that, but if I don't buy the content I'm left behind. It felt like a double gouge. It was then I realized that I'm just renting all this anyway and if I don't keep paying, plus spending more on the extras, that all I've put into it is flushed.
I can't think of one game that has released a full-fledged expansion and not charged for it. FFXI and WoW (the other two big subscriber games) have charged for every expansion released. People have waited in line at midnight to get their hands on the next chapter in WoW.
You can probably bet that GW2 will charge for a full blown expansion whenever they develop one.
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
This!! If you could come out with games now days where you don't max out in 1 to 2 months and then do dailys the rest of your life, maybe people might stick around a while.
I've playing Anarchy Online, Eve Online, and, was playing SWG, up to the so called CU fiasco. and loved the meaningful grind, Anarchy took so long because you had to actually think of ways to ladder in symbiates and implants, and, then Funcom screwed over the community by not keeping up with the game. Eve Online, though time based skilling, allows you to tailor yours skills for the type of stylized combat, manufacturing, or, trading game you love, and, some of those skills took me years to train. as for SWG, I was almost done training up my Jedi tree when the CU bomb hit. and we all know how the community reacted to that disaster. The Industry leaders will never get it. All they see is the WOW numbers, and, the investors only see the possible money. They will never make another game that requires real time for people to think through an entire week for the solution. No, its more about a.) kill this mob- get this skill, or, b.) kill this mob- and get this skill. no thinking on the part of the players part.
Sad couple decades for the MMO industry have begun since 2005
One really bitter and disappointing point in Rift, for me, was after I had committed to an annual subscription, I found out their expansion was going to be extra. So now I'm paying monthly for a game, and then I have to pay more to access the current content. Not only that, but if I don't buy the content I'm left behind. It felt like a double gouge. It was then I realized that I'm just renting all this anyway and if I don't keep paying, plus spending more on the extras, that all I've put into it is flushed.
I can't think of one game that has released a full-fledged expansion and not charged for it. FFXI and WoW (the other two big subscriber games) have charged for every expansion released. People have waited in line at midnight to get their hands on the next chapter in WoW.
You can probably bet that GW2 will charge for a full blown expansion whenever they develop one.
That doesn't make it ok. It's one of the reasons ppl don't buy into p2p anymore. You spend $180 a year on the game and then they charge you $50 for the content they made that you've already paid for.
GW2 is buy to play. You're not paying them to develop new content you paid just to play the game. When new content comes along you buy that as well. There's a huge difference between that and a sub + paying for content.
This!! If you could come out with games now days where you don't max out in 1 to 2 months and then do dailys the rest of your life, maybe people might stick around a while.
What leads you to believe there's a "must do dailies" gun pointed at your head?
Dailies were installed as welfare for folks who sucked at generating wealth (i.e. farmers) in mmos. Here's your food stamps, if you like this better than mindless farming. Income sucks either way.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
That doesn't make it ok. It's one of the reasons ppl don't buy into p2p anymore. You spend $180 a year on the game and then they charge you $50 for the content they made that you've already paid for.
GW2 is buy to play. You're not paying them to develop new content you paid just to play the game. When new content comes along you buy that as well. There's a huge difference between that and a sub + paying for content.
That $15 a month is going towards regular content updates and server/account maintenance.
Meanwhile on the backend, they have a totally different team dedicated towards building the expansions. The monthly fee doesn't cover this expense; the selling of the expansion pack does.
That doesn't make it ok. It's one of the reasons ppl don't buy into p2p anymore. You spend $180 a year on the game and then they charge you $50 for the content they made that you've already paid for.
GW2 is buy to play. You're not paying them to develop new content you paid just to play the game. When new content comes along you buy that as well. There's a huge difference between that and a sub + paying for content.
That $15 a month is going towards regular content updates and server/account maintenance.
Meanwhile on the backend, they have a totally different team dedicated towards building the expansions. The monthly fee doesn't cover this expense; the selling of the expansion pack does.
So you're trying to say it costs WoW $150,000,000 a month to maintain the servers ect....Who do they have doing their updates the Kardashians ?
You're paying twice for things f2p games some how give away and the service and content are not always better or more often.
"The subscription model was a great way to keep everything paid when MMOs were a lifestyle choice, a hobby. MMORPGS had more in common then with a game like golf,” says Hartsman. “Now players simply aren’t willing to commit to the subscription model as large audiences"
BS. Players aren't willing to commit to paying for half-assed and rehashed content. It's that simple. If a game was worth $15 per month, I would pay it.
He also related MMOs to golf? He should've used "bowling", because MMOs have moved from bowling to "bumper-bowling".
Why pay SWTOR 15 per month? So I can fart around with those same boring Warzones over and over? No thanks.
Probably because the games of today doesn't offer you a reason to do so.
I agree with this to some extent, however I think it's more of a "saturation" of games in this particular market. There are too many games coming out within periods of time that really limit most of the player bases time within those games. I myself often will try a new game that has come out and decide to leave the old one. It really is just a continued cycle. Look for players to become more casual and games to be geared for 30-60 minute players rather than the old school 3-6 hour players.
"Now players simply aren’t willing to commit to the subscription model as large audiences. "
Then maybe stop trying to make a game for a large audience?
And why make a game that is so extremely similar to WoW...Why not target a new audience? Targetting people who are burnt out on WoW and then producing a game thats virtualy identical doesnt seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.
Pick a niche, focus on it, and dont cave in to try to appeal to everyone. SWG had a decent playerbase of over 250k and then tried to make their game appeal to the masses. If Lucas Arts had just told SoE to keep improving the game and adding content and balance SWG would still be running today and probably have 500k+ subs. And im one of the people that thinks people look at SWG with rose colered glasses and Im saying that.
And look at the success stories, games like EQ, WoW, even FFXI: these games had extremely well designed worlds, and the world itself was a star of the game. Telara was small, congested, and soulless.
Two things that encourage player retention:
-Great game world
-Medium to long level curve. players get attached to character and far less likely to leave, plus once you hit cap you run out of new places (and abilities) to look forward to. delaying this without leveling feeling like a chore should be a major focus. Not rush everyone to end game
WoW was considered fast leveling at the time but it took the average player several months for their first 60.
And to people say there is more choice now:
There was a time where I could choose between UO, DAoC, AC, AO and EQ. 5 interesting and very varied game, 4 of them were even well made. And i stayed in EQ for years. I cant choose between that kind of quality in modern MMOs. Yeah there is quantity. My local chinese buffet has a huge selection of food too. but there are only two or three items that wont make me shit my brains out 2 hours later.
Originally posted by Aeolron Exactly ! We need mmos with meaningful sandbox elements and meaningful crafting. It wouldn't hurt to level in mmos to take a very long time, what we need is mmos based on group play, EQ proved that and is still around today!
And how many people play EQ? Lets face it. There are too many new games and everybody has a different opinion about what his/her perfect MMo should be. Some love sandboxes, some Themeparks. Everybody wants great graphic, rich content, uniqueness... no game will give you everything you want.... Every year there is something new hyped. Nobody stays with one game anymore... well maybe except few... /grin
Originally posted by Aeolron Exactly ! We need mmos with meaningful sandbox elements and meaningful crafting. It wouldn't hurt to level in mmos to take a very long time, what we need is mmos based on group play, EQ proved that and is still around today!
And how many people play EQ? Lets face it. There are too many new games and everybody has a different opinion about what his/her perfect MMo should be. Some love sandboxes, some Themeparks. Everybody wants great graphic, rich content, uniqueness... no game will give you everything you want.... Every year there is something new hyped. Nobody stays with one game anymore... well maybe except few... /grin
If SWG returned I would still play it. People do not stay with one game any more because they are shallow and have no depth. The main problem with SWG shutting down is that there are no games around that are like it, whereas there are plenty of WOW clones.
So I agree with Aeolron "We need mmos with meaningful sandbox elements and meaningful crafting"
Games like SWTOR can still be around, for you guys, but there are no mmos for us guys
Comments
I find most new MMOs to be shallow, and would not play them if they were fp with no cash shop, or they gave me unlimited cash in their cash shop.
I think Trion is a good company, but I left Rift with like 3 months still paid, it was just too railed, small, and they did not do a good job on the harvesting/crafting. They do a good job of executing their vision for the game, but the daily checklist thing just doesn't excite me to do it.
GW2 looked like it would be good on paper, but I had never played something that seemed so, not sure, the classes seemed dull, did not like their take on non-trinity, I still can't nail down why, but I didn't last long in it...
TOR - I played for a month, knew it wouldn't be a mmo I stayed in long, but had friends playing, got my money worth in the month, but I was done after that, and would not of kept playing if it was f2p after the free month, before actually being f2p with cash shop.
TSW - Actually liked, just suffered the themepark problem of content being used up quick, despite it not having a good harvest/crafting system, which is usually a no go for me. I just thought the quest/story stuff was different and interesting, and I am not a big story person.
Newer mmos seem designed for the game jumper, and prior to Rift, I had never stayed in a MMO less than a year, and many 6-8 years total (UO/EQ). I prefer a sub model myself, I like to know what I am paying, think people having to pay a sub also gives the developers better control over the world and crap people pull, if you can just make a new account and it is free, good luck policing your world. Some f2p models aren't bad, but some feel like someone is trying to milk every dime out of you they can (which I guess they should, but, it puts me off).
You really believe that companies will spend upwards of $100+ milion and not plan to keep players longterm? so why are companies being forced to change tac? Blizzard strangled the market for years if it had competition sub fee's would have risen with the cost of development but you cannot compete in a virtual monopoly so you have to do something else free2play and freemium is that something else. Trying to come out with new concepts is too risky with that much money involved you usually only see that in fledgling markets not mature ones. Players expect high quality graphics, innovative systems, loads of classes or skills, indepth crafting, moldable terrain, massive PvP battles, intricate dungeons and boss fights the list goes on, this costs millions and multiple years of investment without seeing a return, you willing to put your money where you mouth is? now do you still think companies don't plan longterm?
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Of course according to a businessman like SH the future has to be a different model to get money out of the players, aka F2P +cash shop. That's his vision of the future of mmorps.
Now ask a gamer about it. He will tell you that the future of mmorpgs rather has to look like this:
-open world instead of a lobby (capitol city) + instances
-character progression instead of gear progression
-player driven economy instead of item shops
-free choice of skill progression instead of set class templates
-crafting as meaningful as combat
-player driven content instead of "kill 10 rats"
-agriculture, stock breeding instead of pokemons
-terraforming, open world housing and settling instead of instanced guild halls
-etc.
Otherwise, there is no future for mmorpgs. No matter what sub, freemium, platinum, f2p, vip, etc. model the suits come up with.
Yes, people want to be safe with their money, but being safe limits losses, and as has been generally showen lately, seems to be limiting gains also. WoW with a twist hasn't been making too many people rich in the last 6-8 years either. I kind of view it like moneyball or something, I am sure they have a formula....If I add housing, how mnay people actually will stay or play because of it, if I have a player economy with indepth crafting/player economy, same thing... They min/max. The player that enjoys depth as I usually call it is a minority, verse the player that wants to just kill things and not bother with crafting, a house and harvesting. So you generally get the 'depth' tacked on, and it is not good, but enough to say you have it, ala WAR, that had to be the worse crafting thrown into a game I had ever seen at launch.
So I agree, people want to keep their customers, but they also want to minimize what they spend and the risks,. TOR spent a lot of money, and dared to be different, I don't think it worked out for them too much, but they did try. I think the next big MMO will be someone that dared to try, most likely, verse one playing it safe.
The sub-based model is for a perpetual game experience. That's why it works, is worth the money, and people are more than willing to go for it.
MMOs take (or should take) significantly longer to develop than a single player game. It is much more intensive. It has much higher upkeep. The sub spreads the upfront cost over time and covers upkeep.
The problem right now is with the developers who are making games with a single player mindset. SWTOR is a great example of this. It is a fantastic solo game. It's MMO features are lacking. If you buy the box and sub, it's essentially turning into a $120.00ish single player game. That's not appealing. The growing trend by developers is to take the massive out of MMO. It's destroying the genre and leaving most gamers with a bad taste in their mouth. It isn't an issue of Sandbox vs. Themepark (the difference between the two is typically greatly exaggerated). It's an issue of quality vs. garbage. If a game can be churned through in 3ish months, it's garbage.
the reason people quit games and do not commit to them is they are all easy mode games nowadays where you get everything handed to you on a silver platter . If you take away the challenge in games and allow everyone to have everything with no effort people leave because they get bored. Carrot on a stick games like DAOC and EQ that required you to work hard to achieve your goals people stuck with for years. Devs nowadays do not get it , you have to force group people to make them be social and you make rewards hard to achieve so people feel a sense of accomplishment. Instead they listen to the whiny vocal minority about how everything is to hard or time consuming and nurf things into the ground.
The most social game ive ever played in my life was DAOC , because it took you a month or longer to reach max level and another 3 months to get to a respectable realm rank and you did all this by having to look for groups before dungeon finders were made etc. You were forced to make friends in your realm and you built up bonds there with those same people that lasted years. I cannot even name one person ive met in recent games I still talk to as a friend , yet my old DAOC friends I still talk to on facebook to this day .
It's easy to stay in games for years when there was only 3 or 4 to choose from. Now a new game comes out every few months and gamers like jumping games.
Ppl make excuses as to why they do it but even if they made " great " games like they once did...ppl would still game hop.
What convincing argument can you put forth to convince me that games that are fine, and that players have poor ability to test the satisfaction level of the games they play? You are taking a position that is at the least counter-productive, and more likely to just be an exercise in sophistry.
Games are not bad because the audience is bad
The audience is bad because they have bad habits from old games
therefore only new audience is good
Where are you going with this?
Survivor of the great MMORPG Famine of 2011
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Arenanet are having these exact problems now, even though at the core the game is not to dissimilar to other themeparks it tried to shake up many concepts and it struggles to get the playerbase understanding them and balancing their own game so you see a lot of frustration on the GW2 boards. This is a prime example of trying to push the envelope, players are not patient anymore if it doesn't work perfectly out of the box they just throw their toys out of the pram or just leave and we wonder why companies stick to tried and tested concepts and maybe add a twist.
Arenanet caved in when the progression boys moaned about no progression and in doing so pissed off the GW franchise fans. Doing new innovative things is a massive risk, will it pay off for Arenanet? I don't know, GW2 will probably end up in the same situation as GW1 a respected niche MMO and that is being watched by other developers I'm sure. Sometimes we the playerbase have to take so responsibility and stick by companies that attempt to shake things up and be patient, these games are massive undertakings and complex entities, we have to stop acting like spoilt children.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
The first words of the post should answer your questions, "that's perception" you perceive MMO's to have problems others don't including me, so I don't have to convince you of anything. I see for me longevity in SW:TOR, GW2 and Tera the games I've played or play in the past year with no less depth than games of yore, can you convince me I'm wrong? is there any point? its all just opinion.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
Thats just it...i dont find the p2p games as being any better than the free games so why spend the money??.....Also Rift was a WoW copy (wont even call it a clone) and it felt like I'd been there and done that before I even reached level 10 in it........I was surprised players stayed in Rift as long as they did.
I can't think of one game that has released a full-fledged expansion and not charged for it. FFXI and WoW (the other two big subscriber games) have charged for every expansion released. People have waited in line at midnight to get their hands on the next chapter in WoW.
You can probably bet that GW2 will charge for a full blown expansion whenever they develop one.
This!! If you could come out with games now days where you don't max out in 1 to 2 months and then do dailys the rest of your life, maybe people might stick around a while.
I've playing Anarchy Online, Eve Online, and, was playing SWG, up to the so called CU fiasco. and loved the meaningful grind, Anarchy took so long because you had to actually think of ways to ladder in symbiates and implants, and, then Funcom screwed over the community by not keeping up with the game. Eve Online, though time based skilling, allows you to tailor yours skills for the type of stylized combat, manufacturing, or, trading game you love, and, some of those skills took me years to train. as for SWG, I was almost done training up my Jedi tree when the CU bomb hit. and we all know how the community reacted to that disaster. The Industry leaders will never get it. All they see is the WOW numbers, and, the investors only see the possible money. They will never make another game that requires real time for people to think through an entire week for the solution. No, its more about a.) kill this mob- get this skill, or, b.) kill this mob- and get this skill. no thinking on the part of the players part.
Sad couple decades for the MMO industry have begun since 2005
That doesn't make it ok. It's one of the reasons ppl don't buy into p2p anymore. You spend $180 a year on the game and then they charge you $50 for the content they made that you've already paid for.
GW2 is buy to play. You're not paying them to develop new content you paid just to play the game. When new content comes along you buy that as well. There's a huge difference between that and a sub + paying for content.
What leads you to believe there's a "must do dailies" gun pointed at your head?
Dailies were installed as welfare for folks who sucked at generating wealth (i.e. farmers) in mmos. Here's your food stamps, if you like this better than mindless farming. Income sucks either way.
Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.
That $15 a month is going towards regular content updates and server/account maintenance.
Meanwhile on the backend, they have a totally different team dedicated towards building the expansions. The monthly fee doesn't cover this expense; the selling of the expansion pack does.
So you're trying to say it costs WoW $150,000,000 a month to maintain the servers ect....Who do they have doing their updates the Kardashians ?
You're paying twice for things f2p games some how give away and the service and content are not always better or more often.
companies are allowed to make a profit just so you know.
"The subscription model was a great way to keep everything paid when MMOs were a lifestyle choice, a hobby. MMORPGS had more in common then with a game like golf,” says Hartsman. “Now players simply aren’t willing to commit to the subscription model as large audiences"
BS. Players aren't willing to commit to paying for half-assed and rehashed content. It's that simple. If a game was worth $15 per month, I would pay it.
He also related MMOs to golf? He should've used "bowling", because MMOs have moved from bowling to "bumper-bowling".
Why pay SWTOR 15 per month? So I can fart around with those same boring Warzones over and over? No thanks.
I agree with this to some extent, however I think it's more of a "saturation" of games in this particular market. There are too many games coming out within periods of time that really limit most of the player bases time within those games. I myself often will try a new game that has come out and decide to leave the old one. It really is just a continued cycle. Look for players to become more casual and games to be geared for 30-60 minute players rather than the old school 3-6 hour players.
A PS4 ESO guild accepting applications at http://lowlyknights.enjin.com
"Now players simply aren’t willing to commit to the subscription model as large audiences. "
Then maybe stop trying to make a game for a large audience?
And why make a game that is so extremely similar to WoW...Why not target a new audience? Targetting people who are burnt out on WoW and then producing a game thats virtualy identical doesnt seem to make a whole lot of sense to me.
Pick a niche, focus on it, and dont cave in to try to appeal to everyone. SWG had a decent playerbase of over 250k and then tried to make their game appeal to the masses. If Lucas Arts had just told SoE to keep improving the game and adding content and balance SWG would still be running today and probably have 500k+ subs. And im one of the people that thinks people look at SWG with rose colered glasses and Im saying that.
And look at the success stories, games like EQ, WoW, even FFXI: these games had extremely well designed worlds, and the world itself was a star of the game. Telara was small, congested, and soulless.
Two things that encourage player retention:
-Great game world
-Medium to long level curve. players get attached to character and far less likely to leave, plus once you hit cap you run out of new places (and abilities) to look forward to. delaying this without leveling feeling like a chore should be a major focus. Not rush everyone to end game
WoW was considered fast leveling at the time but it took the average player several months for their first 60.
And to people say there is more choice now:
There was a time where I could choose between UO, DAoC, AC, AO and EQ. 5 interesting and very varied game, 4 of them were even well made. And i stayed in EQ for years. I cant choose between that kind of quality in modern MMOs. Yeah there is quantity. My local chinese buffet has a huge selection of food too. but there are only two or three items that wont make me shit my brains out 2 hours later.
And how many people play EQ? Lets face it. There are too many new games and everybody has a different opinion about what his/her perfect MMo should be. Some love sandboxes, some Themeparks. Everybody wants great graphic, rich content, uniqueness... no game will give you everything you want.... Every year there is something new hyped. Nobody stays with one game anymore... well maybe except few... /grin
Sith Warrior - Story of Hate and Love http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxKrlwXt7Ao
Imperial Agent - Rise of Cipher Nine http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBBj3eJWBvU&feature=youtu.be
Imperial Agent - Hunt for the Eagle Part 1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQqjYYU128E
If SWG returned I would still play it. People do not stay with one game any more because they are shallow and have no depth. The main problem with SWG shutting down is that there are no games around that are like it, whereas there are plenty of WOW clones.
So I agree with Aeolron "We need mmos with meaningful sandbox elements and meaningful crafting"
Games like SWTOR can still be around, for you guys, but there are no mmos for us guys
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012