Originally posted by Battlerock I'm very stoked for this but very concerned about the pay model. For pc only people the pay model is fine. For console players though and hybrid console pc players, thier worlds are about to be flipped upside down when next gen releases. Console should expect to see a mass decline in population when next gen consoles hit.
Does anyone know what sub would is going to look like given you have a psnetwork sub active? I want ARR to be successful, im concerned with how the console culture will take it though. They are not used to selling a kidney or taking thier childrens college funds and spending it on virtual goods. On top of that, there is all kinds of goodness coming down the pipe. What does success look like for ARR 3 months of subs at or near peak numbers? Like I said I want it to succeed, but its stepping into a competitive market thats about to catch fire.
YOu dont need a psn plus to play arr on the ps4 ... nad its 5 bucks a month for plus who cares
" is charging a box fee and having a tiered subscription fee really the right way to go? Yoshi-P has said they would rather work with a steady stream of revenue as opposed to dealing with the ups and downs of a microtransaction model."
Maybe it's just me but as subscribers drop subscription one month, come back later with additional content drop again for awhile, rinse and repeat, won't they always be dealing with "ups and downs" of revenue stream, no matter what model they use? I'm all for them going with a subscription model but I don't know that their reasoning makes any sense, at least it doesn't to me.
I think that 2-3 months post launch it will be painfully obvious to Square Enix how P2P is not a good model in the western markets anymore. That is where you see significant sub dropoff at the end of there 2nd month, and then due to low influx of new players you are left in a tough position.
Decent game, but not strong enough to thrive as a P2P title in F2P market.
Just my opinion, it will be interesting to see how this goes.
Couldn't have said it better. If people are able to max level before the 30 days of free play, this game is doomed. Going to be interesting to see a AAA title try subscription again. I am sure they already have the future plan laid out to go F2P when subs get low and box sales dry up.
It won't happen in 30 days. Just because you get your main job to level 50 does not mean you are done. For me as a paladin for example, I need to get marauder and conjurer to about 34-35 each so I can have my full range of usable abilities at 50. This does not even consider crafting at this point which are main classes in the game and require just as much time and effort as any other combat class to get to 50.
theres no way you will get all jobs maxed out in 6 months unless you play 24/7 without sleep and even if you could which you can't (beta player 1.0 psp 1.0 beta player 2.0 just so you understand I know what i'm talking about) the amount of shit you will miss out on just makes owning the game for the single reason of leveling to max asap pointless FFXI was killed with abyssea yes killed played it from euro launch and now you can with a little help get to 99 in 24 hours but your skills are fucked.
if you get to 50 in 30 days on all jobs get a life.
Hate to say but tis game stays up only with FF fans. if u not FF fan, u see tis another asian grinding mmorpg. UI is nice but combat get very repeative and boring. Done some FATES and thouse give only exp mainly, money gain is..nothing really. FATES dont work so good as Rift dynamic events.
I can't help but HOPE that this game shows the sub model is still viable. I loathe the F2P model, it just feels so used car salesmen like. Want an extra bag? Got the game currency to buy one? Great! Pay us real money first so you can buy an extra bag slot. Oh and btw we're going to sell our gems, zen, cartel credits, coins, insert name here, in sums where you will never be able to zero out. You'll always have some left over and it will always be close to the price of something. Just uhg. I understand some games aren't this bad, Tera, makes their F2P more palatable. The majority though....not so much.
B2P like Guild Wars was one thing, for the most part the things they sell are cosmetic or ways to level quicker. Nothing in it is an unlock to features of the game.
I can't really explain why I'm happy to give 15 bucks a month for a sub but spending the same amount of money a month in a F2P game makes me cringe. As long as I'm getting patches with a fair amount of content I'd rather pay a sub for a good game.
AGREED
Blizzard shows it. among others-so excly what other mmos are they going agaisnt ?
are they just taking advantage that they are console game?
Hate to say but tis game stays up only with FF fans. if u not FF fan, u see tis another asian grinding mmorpg. UI is nice but combat get very repeative and boring. Done some FATES and thouse give only exp mainly, money gain is..nothing really. FATES dont work so good as Rift dynamic events.
Will see how its turns....
Even though I like the game I would have to mainly agree with you. And yes, I'm a FF fan. But on paper the game looks as generic as they come in terms of features and themeparkeness.
I think that 2-3 months post launch it will be painfully obvious to Square Enix how P2P is not a good model in the western markets anymore. That is where you see significant sub dropoff at the end of there 2nd month, and then due to low influx of new players you are left in a tough position.
Decent game, but not strong enough to thrive as a P2P title in F2P market.
Just my opinion, it will be interesting to see how this goes.
Couldn't have said it better. If people are able to max level before the 30 days of free play, this game is doomed. Going to be interesting to see a AAA title try subscription again. I am sure they already have the future plan laid out to go F2P when subs get low and box sales dry up.
You also have to remember that One Character can Level all the jobs, no need to re-roll multiple characters, if you wish not to. So reaching max level with one class/job is only the beginning. I have to say too, that from all the forums/post I have been reading, and not just on this site. Almost every person planning on playing the game, prefers the P2P model over the other two.
One other note, Final Fantasy 11 was released eleven years ago, and is still a sub game.
I think that 2-3 months post launch it will be painfully obvious to Square Enix how P2P is not a good model in the western markets anymore. That is where you see significant sub dropoff at the end of there 2nd month, and then due to low influx of new players you are left in a tough position.
Decent game, but not strong enough to thrive as a P2P title in F2P market.
Just my opinion, it will be interesting to see how this goes.
Couldn't have said it better. If people are able to max level before the 30 days of free play, this game is doomed. Going to be interesting to see a AAA title try subscription again. I am sure they already have the future plan laid out to go F2P when subs get low and box sales dry up.
You also have to remember that One Character can Level all the jobs, no need to re-roll multiple characters, if you wish not to. So reaching max level with one class/job is only the beginning. I have to say too, that from all the forums/post I have been reading, and not just on this site. Almost every person planning on playing the game, prefers the P2P model over the other two.
One other note, Final Fantasy 11 was released eleven years ago, and is still a sub game.
/bow
If it's true that they don't have to respond to investors as Joshy said then there is no reason for it to go f2p anytime soon, unless it does really horrible.
" is charging a box fee and having a tiered subscription fee really the right way to go? Yoshi-P has said they would rather work with a steady stream of revenue as opposed to dealing with the ups and downs of a microtransaction model."
Maybe it's just me but as subscribers drop subscription one month, come back later with additional content drop again for awhile, rinse and repeat, won't they always be dealing with "ups and downs" of revenue stream, no matter what model they use? I'm all for them going with a subscription model but I don't know that their reasoning makes any sense, at least it doesn't to me.
There is always fluctuations in the the stream of income. P2P models have far less drastic "economic mood swings" than F2P models. You literally have to come up with cash shop items every three months to get revenue. With P2P if an average person subscribes 7 out of the 12 months, than that's far more stable than the F2P model.
the F2P model is very schizophrenic. Just like YoshiP said, it's inherent design makes it impossible to have long term, stable growth.
" is charging a box fee and having a tiered subscription fee really the right way to go? Yoshi-P has said they would rather work with a steady stream of revenue as opposed to dealing with the ups and downs of a microtransaction model."
Maybe it's just me but as subscribers drop subscription one month, come back later with additional content drop again for awhile, rinse and repeat, won't they always be dealing with "ups and downs" of revenue stream, no matter what model they use? I'm all for them going with a subscription model but I don't know that their reasoning makes any sense, at least it doesn't to me.
More to do with the fact that with Subscriptions you tend to have people buying that month so you know for that month you have 150k Sub payments, you then know your fixed costs and plan accordingly, surprisingly most people on subs will remain subbed, it is a low cost for most players. Therefore they know their fixed cost for the following month and can plan accordingly, do we do this content and these fixes, assign devs to new content etc
Now look at P2P, you might have 1 million users, you only have 200k spending money on it, that means you need to cover the 800K not paying anything the play (Data storage space, Bandwidth and server capacity.
So before you even start looking at your costs you need to pay from last months income to keep going, now you have a set amount to pay someone to do the work for this month, but you have no way of knowing what impact it will have one the game until the end of the month.
Kinda Kookie but easiest way to look at it is, SE are able to plan ahead, they have no investors to pay off so they can have good and bad months for subs, but they know their fixed costs are month to month as they only need to cater for paying players.
F2P companies are have to subsidise the non-paying people in their game (none Revenue Generating) they then need to keep their Investors happy so will come up with 'Bundles' to try and coax players into spending more money, rather than focusing on long term content.
Personally I found Yoshi P's Interview very enlightening and am glad I stuck through my support of them on 1.0 and am looking forward to ARR
Please read this if you are thinking this game will go free to play.
Thank you.
Ultimately the decision to go f2p or b2p is not up to the director BUT the company CEO. I have been here long enough to know that those comments are simply a buff until it's eventual f2p or b2p. The secret world and TERA guys did the exact same thing. So don't take it as it will never happen, take it as it will never happen as long as it meets a certain criteria.
Great write up! Playing the beta myself, and the exciting thing I am looking forward to is finally having an MMO I can get my non PC friends to play on their PS3s and still play with them on my PC.
Though I plan to pick up the PS3/PS4 versions myself anyways because options are always good!
Please read this if you are thinking this game will go free to play.
Thank you.
Ultimately the decision to go f2p or b2p is not up to the director BUT the company CEO. I have been here long enough to know that those comments are simply a buff until it's eventual f2p or b2p. The secret world and TERA guys did the exact same thing. So don't take it as it will never happen, take it as it will never happen as long as it meets a certain criteria.
You must be quite new or young then. SE has a long history and, as stated several times already, do not have external investors to please, will accept a profit each month as a good thing.
TSW and TERA were new games, no chequered history or solid fan base to work with. SE and the FF Franchise has both.
Heck when was the last time you heard a Game Studio go "Sorry we messed up, please play this for free while we rebuild the entire game with a new game engine and Director"....
" is charging a box fee and having a tiered subscription fee really the right way to go? Yoshi-P has said they would rather work with a steady stream of revenue as opposed to dealing with the ups and downs of a microtransaction model."
Maybe it's just me but as subscribers drop subscription one month, come back later with additional content drop again for awhile, rinse and repeat, won't they always be dealing with "ups and downs" of revenue stream, no matter what model they use? I'm all for them going with a subscription model but I don't know that their reasoning makes any sense, at least it doesn't to me.
More to do with the fact that with Subscriptions you tend to have people buying that month so you know for that month you have 150k Sub payments, you then know your fixed costs and plan accordingly, surprisingly most people on subs will remain subbed, it is a low cost for most players. Therefore they know their fixed cost for the following month and can plan accordingly, do we do this content and these fixes, assign devs to new content etc
Now look at P2P, you might have 1 million users, you only have 200k spending money on it, that means you need to cover the 800K not paying anything the play (Data storage space, Bandwidth and server capacity.
So before you even start looking at your costs you need to pay from last months income to keep going, now you have a set amount to pay someone to do the work for this month, but you have no way of knowing what impact it will have one the game until the end of the month.
Kinda Kookie but easiest way to look at it is, SE are able to plan ahead, they have no investors to pay off so they can have good and bad months for subs, but they know their fixed costs are month to month as they only need to cater for paying players.
F2P companies are have to subsidise the non-paying people in their game (none Revenue Generating) they then need to keep their Investors happy so will come up with 'Bundles' to try and coax players into spending more money, rather than focusing on long term content.
Personally I found Yoshi P's Interview very enlightening and am glad I stuck through my support of them on 1.0 and am looking forward to ARR
You Nailed it. Some people need too see that sub in ffxiv means everyone have access too content no restriction and also as long SE dont create a cash shop this will keep alot of gamers happy and paying there sub each month. Cash Shop + P2W= FAIL!
Originally posted by tkreep If Final Fantasy 11 hav not gone free to play already after like 10+ years than i dont see how people think ARR will.
This x1000.
SE develops, publishes, and distributes their own games.
They are financially beholden to no one.
And they are going to make so, so much money off of the FF10 HD remakes, FF XV, and Kingdom Hearts 3, along with a probably Tomb Raider sequel (though SE is just the publisher).
Originally posted by Ehllfhire I will be playing this game until Archeage (that will be GotY). I enjoy the game thoughly even if its built like Rift/GW2
ArcheAge failed as P2P in the East, it's going to crash and burn even as F2P in the West. Sorry.
It's just the next TSW/GW2/TOR/ESO/Wildstart/WAR etc. over hyped game that can never live up to the expectations.
You people saying "not free to play, I won't play it!" need to get over yourselves. If you won't support the people that spent time to make the game by buying a key ($30) and a small (less than an hours pay for a LOT of people) monthly fee of about $15 then you aren't the type of person I want to play a game with anyway so please, make good on your threat and don't play.
I welcome a sub game. Will be a refreshing break from the children and autists overcrowding the f2p market.
you're talking about the same company that sells mobile games for $20 bucks, and they were willing to remake the game rather than call it quits make it F2P, if anyone can make it work its the company that has 25+ years making the same game. i don't see this going F2P anytime soon.
well i for one prefer subs, and im UK, and i think everyone in my gaming community Probally does too, infact i hate f2p games because it just ends up being buy to win and well i dont play like that and that makes me not able to get interested in f2p games.
subscription is best way to go , if it was f2p i wouldnt even play it , f2p is for scrubs
Comments
YOu dont need a psn plus to play arr on the ps4 ... nad its 5 bucks a month for plus who cares
" is charging a box fee and having a tiered subscription fee really the right way to go? Yoshi-P has said they would rather work with a steady stream of revenue as opposed to dealing with the ups and downs of a microtransaction model."
Maybe it's just me but as subscribers drop subscription one month, come back later with additional content drop again for awhile, rinse and repeat, won't they always be dealing with "ups and downs" of revenue stream, no matter what model they use? I'm all for them going with a subscription model but I don't know that their reasoning makes any sense, at least it doesn't to me.
theres no way you will get all jobs maxed out in 6 months unless you play 24/7 without sleep and even if you could which you can't (beta player 1.0 psp 1.0 beta player 2.0 just so you understand I know what i'm talking about) the amount of shit you will miss out on just makes owning the game for the single reason of leveling to max asap pointless FFXI was killed with abyssea yes killed played it from euro launch and now you can with a little help get to 99 in 24 hours but your skills are fucked.
if you get to 50 in 30 days on all jobs get a life.
Hate to say but tis game stays up only with FF fans. if u not FF fan, u see tis another asian grinding mmorpg. UI is nice but combat get very repeative and boring. Done some FATES and thouse give only exp mainly, money gain is..nothing really. FATES dont work so good as Rift dynamic events.
Will see how its turns....
Blizzard shows it. among others-so excly what other mmos are they going agaisnt ?
are they just taking advantage that they are console game?
Even though I like the game I would have to mainly agree with you. And yes, I'm a FF fan. But on paper the game looks as generic as they come in terms of features and themeparkeness.
You also have to remember that One Character can Level all the jobs, no need to re-roll multiple characters, if you wish not to. So reaching max level with one class/job is only the beginning. I have to say too, that from all the forums/post I have been reading, and not just on this site. Almost every person planning on playing the game, prefers the P2P model over the other two.
One other note, Final Fantasy 11 was released eleven years ago, and is still a sub game.
/bow
If it's true that they don't have to respond to investors as Joshy said then there is no reason for it to go f2p anytime soon, unless it does really horrible.
There is always fluctuations in the the stream of income. P2P models have far less drastic "economic mood swings" than F2P models. You literally have to come up with cash shop items every three months to get revenue. With P2P if an average person subscribes 7 out of the 12 months, than that's far more stable than the F2P model.
the F2P model is very schizophrenic. Just like YoshiP said, it's inherent design makes it impossible to have long term, stable growth.
More to do with the fact that with Subscriptions you tend to have people buying that month so you know for that month you have 150k Sub payments, you then know your fixed costs and plan accordingly, surprisingly most people on subs will remain subbed, it is a low cost for most players. Therefore they know their fixed cost for the following month and can plan accordingly, do we do this content and these fixes, assign devs to new content etc
Now look at P2P, you might have 1 million users, you only have 200k spending money on it, that means you need to cover the 800K not paying anything the play (Data storage space, Bandwidth and server capacity.
So before you even start looking at your costs you need to pay from last months income to keep going, now you have a set amount to pay someone to do the work for this month, but you have no way of knowing what impact it will have one the game until the end of the month.
Kinda Kookie but easiest way to look at it is, SE are able to plan ahead, they have no investors to pay off so they can have good and bad months for subs, but they know their fixed costs are month to month as they only need to cater for paying players.
F2P companies are have to subsidise the non-paying people in their game (none Revenue Generating) they then need to keep their Investors happy so will come up with 'Bundles' to try and coax players into spending more money, rather than focusing on long term content.
Personally I found Yoshi P's Interview very enlightening and am glad I stuck through my support of them on 1.0 and am looking forward to ARR
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Norsefire-logo.png
Ultimately the decision to go f2p or b2p is not up to the director BUT the company CEO. I have been here long enough to know that those comments are simply a buff until it's eventual f2p or b2p. The secret world and TERA guys did the exact same thing. So don't take it as it will never happen, take it as it will never happen as long as it meets a certain criteria.
Great write up! Playing the beta myself, and the exciting thing I am looking forward to is finally having an MMO I can get my non PC friends to play on their PS3s and still play with them on my PC.
Though I plan to pick up the PS3/PS4 versions myself anyways because options are always good!
You must be quite new or young then. SE has a long history and, as stated several times already, do not have external investors to please, will accept a profit each month as a good thing.
TSW and TERA were new games, no chequered history or solid fan base to work with. SE and the FF Franchise has both.
Heck when was the last time you heard a Game Studio go "Sorry we messed up, please play this for free while we rebuild the entire game with a new game engine and Director"....
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ab/Norsefire-logo.png
You Nailed it. Some people need too see that sub in ffxiv means everyone have access too content no restriction and also as long SE dont create a cash shop this will keep alot of gamers happy and paying there sub each month. Cash Shop + P2W= FAIL!
Any graphical, audio, or gameplay restrictions not seen in other mmos but found in FFXIV can be blamed on one thing.
PS3
This x1000.
SE develops, publishes, and distributes their own games.
They are financially beholden to no one.
And they are going to make so, so much money off of the FF10 HD remakes, FF XV, and Kingdom Hearts 3, along with a probably Tomb Raider sequel (though SE is just the publisher).
ArcheAge failed as P2P in the East, it's going to crash and burn even as F2P in the West. Sorry.
It's just the next TSW/GW2/TOR/ESO/Wildstart/WAR etc. over hyped game that can never live up to the expectations.
I welcome a sub game. Will be a refreshing break from the children and autists overcrowding the f2p market.
well i for one prefer subs, and im UK, and i think everyone in my gaming community Probally does too, infact i hate f2p games because it just ends up being buy to win and well i dont play like that and that makes me not able to get interested in f2p games.
subscription is best way to go , if it was f2p i wouldnt even play it , f2p is for scrubs
"Cure from Thurmatage" You got that wrong. Its Conjurer with Cure. *nerdrage*
We're you paying attention? *suspicious look*
Decent article. Hit the features on point. Hit the problems the game faces on point. Pretty good nothing amazing.
MMORPG Gamers/Developers need a reality check!