Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
Yeah, it is funny. Except WoW, no sub-only game is successful even at $15. Thinking raising the price is the way to go .... seems very disconnected with basic economics.
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
I spent on average $30-40 a month on WOT for about 6 months before I burned out and I was a small fish in that pond as I never bought gold ammo. That was what it took just to convert elite XP to general XP and buy the occasional gold tank here and there. There are lots and lots of people out their right now spending that or more each month on their game of choice.
This thread is a perfect example of why F2P is so successful. You tell people that a game has a $35 sub and they will lose their minds. You tell people that a game is F2P and they will fall all over themselves spending hundreds or thousands monthly/weekly or even on a founder's pack for an unreleased game.
I dunno, the human brain just has a gap when it hits the word "free". "Yes I did spend $500 in this game, but it's F2P so it's not like I HAD to do it, I just wanted to." "OMG $35/mo? WTF! No game is worth $35/mo, not even Star Citizen! Well except for the Javelin ship, it is worth $2,500 - but not $35/mo." And that, in a nutshell, is the reality game developers are faced with. Complete and utter cognitive dissonance of the player base.
This thread is a perfect example of why F2P is so successful. You tell people that a game has a $35 sub and they will lose their minds. You tell people that a game is F2P and they will fall all over themselves spending hundreds or thousands monthly/weekly or even on a founder's pack for an unreleased game.
I dunno, the human brain just has a gap when it hits the word "free". "Yes I did spend $500 in this game, but it's F2P so it's not like I HAD to do it, I just wanted to." "OMG $35/mo? WTF! No game is worth $35/mo, not even Star Citizen! Well except for the Javelin ship, it is worth $2,500 - but not $35/mo." And that, in a nutshell, is the reality game developers are faced with. Complete and utter cognitive dissonance of the player base.
At this point, I would just settle for a MMO that actually even has real RPG elements. It seems like most games completely ignore the RPG part of the title. I get more out of an actual RPG than I do a MMO, and it didn't used to be that way. MMORPGs were basically just RPGs you played with friends, now they are just games you maybe play with friends, but you can mostly play by yourself, and there isn't much "RPG" to it, everything is just linear progress, barely any choice at all.
Every MMO released in 10 years has aimed to be cheaper yet comparable to WoW. WoW is a $15/ mo game and it's worth every penny of it's $15/mo. The reason we can't find games we like is because games aren't worth their subs, except for WoW. The next game that finally is the 'wow killer' isn't going to be cheaper, it's going to be bigger, better and more expensive, and players are going to love paying every penny to be in the experience.
We all whine and moan about f2p, item malls, p2p, b2p... while the fact is a true first class MMO is worth every penny of it's sub. Not some chinese garbage dressed up to satisfy a western audience, I mean a real MMO that leaves you feeling the way you felt the first time you watched 300 every time you log in.
Can a developer please aim to make a MMO of this calibur and quit giving us less than or equal to WoWs?
Thanks
Rofl. Who says wow is worth it? That's a matter of opinion.
I have no problem with a monthly $15 sub at all. I'd rather pay monthly and have access to the total game than play f2p and be blocked from certain things. Not to mention, I don't like the attitude that f2p has brought with it.
That being said, $35 a month is way too much money for any game out there at the moment. I'd be wiling to pay $20 or maybe even $25 BUT in exchange I want the following things...
1. A written contract from the gaming company that they will NEVER at any time go f2p or add an item mall that costs real life money.
2. That housing is NOT a "we might get to it later" idea but a reality on release.
3. That housing doesn't have "hooks" but is good housing like in EQ2 and SWG. You should be able to place anything anywhere in the house, break out of the house confines, and be able ot place anything on the x,y,z axis.
4. That it has GOOD crafting. This click and done stuff needs to end. People should be able to level just crafting alone and actually be involved in the crafting of an object. That being said, it shouldn't take more than a few minutes to create something either. And -I- should be the one crafting, not send my companion off to do it ala SWTOR (one of the worst systems I've ever seen) where it costs an arm and a leg to do it.
4. A sandbox game, meaning that I have a place in the world and involvement in it without having it be a theme park from end to end.
5. PvP is NEVER required but totally optional.
6. Get rid of the leveling system but find alternative advancements for the game.
7. Give me more to do than just theme park questing and raiding, and pvp. Collections and more.
8. Make the world responsive to what players do. Meaning, start us all as neutral characters and let our choices through the game determine what happens, then make the npc's react to us in that way. It should effect what quests we can get from certain points in the game. And make the choices more than just black, white and gray, make them morally complicated just like in real life.
9. Stop making it so that every single player, npc, mob, etc knows EXACTLY whether you are good, bad or neutral within seconds of talking to you and where the arrow is coming from. Seriously, in real life, if someone is sitting in the trees or behind a building, do you know in a half second EXACTLY where the arrow or gunshot is coming from? Really? A distance mob should not immediately know to run directly to YOU when there are 10 other people around so they can fight you in melee.
10. That brings me to the final thing. Mobs should be more intelligent. Just because I walk within a bears reach should NOT immediately mean that the bear is going to attack me. Defend itself if I attack, yes. Growl a warning, yes. But immediately attack just because I'm 100 feet away? Not going to happen. At that distance, it would run away if it had any option whatsoever.
There's probably more but this is a good start. If a game wants me to pay more money, then they need to up the ante. Give me more.
This thread is a perfect example of why F2P is so successful. You tell people that a game has a $35 sub and they will lose their minds. You tell people that a game is F2P and they will fall all over themselves spending hundreds or thousands monthly/weekly or even on a founder's pack for an unreleased game.
I dunno, the human brain just has a gap when it hits the word "free". "Yes I did spend $500 in this game, but it's F2P so it's not like I HAD to do it, I just wanted to." "OMG $35/mo? WTF! No game is worth $35/mo, not even Star Citizen! Well except for the Javelin ship, it is worth $2,500 - but not $35/mo." And that, in a nutshell, is the reality game developers are faced with. Complete and utter cognitive dissonance of the player base.
I actually have a really interesting video that explains why people do this:
This thread is a perfect example of why F2P is so successful. You tell people that a game has a $35 sub and they will lose their minds. You tell people that a game is F2P and they will fall all over themselves spending hundreds or thousands monthly/weekly or even on a founder's pack for an unreleased game.
I dunno, the human brain just has a gap when it hits the word "free". "Yes I did spend $500 in this game, but it's F2P so it's not like I HAD to do it, I just wanted to." "OMG $35/mo? WTF! No game is worth $35/mo, not even Star Citizen! Well except for the Javelin ship, it is worth $2,500 - but not $35/mo." And that, in a nutshell, is the reality game developers are faced with. Complete and utter cognitive dissonance of the player base.
You have a very good point but I think it's a bit more complicated that that. People do have a disconnect between when someone tells them something is free and if it really is free but people also have this need for instant gratification. When you spend $2500 on a ship in SC you get at least a piece of that ship right away. When you spend $15 a month on a sub what you are getting is a little harder to describe much less fee excited about. Sure that first time you install the game and start to play it's there but over time that fades and the value for that recurring fee is harder to justify. That's why all subscription games do auto renewal and try to make the process as easy to forget about as possible.
One of the reasons gambling boxes are so popular is that they fit into human nature so well. You get a item that you can open for a "prize" right away getting both the excitement of buying something and the excitement from potentially beating the odds. Even when you lose you still have the desire to try again and again hoping to finally "hit it big".
I hate what F2P has done to how we play MMO's but even so it's a payment model that fits how the average human brain is wired a lot better than subscriptions ever where.
Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
Yeah, it is funny. Except WoW, no sub-only game is successful even at $15. Thinking raising the price is the way to go .... seems very disconnected with basic economics.
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
and once upon a time, playing Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to today's MMO, cost $2 PER HOUR.
For $35 a month the game better be damn good. Now, $20 or $25 would work. The $15 sub from vanilla Wow and EQ would be something like that in todays money and it worked fine for them but you would cut out a large part of the possibly players with $35, student for example have a tight a budget and while they could pay that money if they were hooked most of them would not try the game out.
So you either would have to focus your game on older players with jobs or figure out some other thing to make it worth for students and teens to put that much of their monthly income on a single game.
It is true that a great MMO would be worth $35 a month, at least for me but with the competitionthe game you make needs to be awesome, and it needs to be constantly updated and have zero microtransactions.
Putting the fee at $25 would probably generate more cash in any case since you will get more players for that.
Price is irrelevant if the product has quality people will pay it. People fork over $500-750 every 2 years for a new iphone. If someone actually made a quality MMO where it was obvious your sub fee was going into the game and not the pockets of the investors people would be willing to pay for that sub.
Do you know what the problem with MMOs ? These companies have investors thinking they can get rich fast by making a wow clone. You pay $15 a month for that wow clone but how much of that goes back into the game ? Probably a fraction of it.
Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
Yeah, it is funny. Except WoW, no sub-only game is successful even at $15. Thinking raising the price is the way to go .... seems very disconnected with basic economics.
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
and once upon a time, playing Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to today's MMO, cost $2 PER HOUR.
I think the world changes everyday.
But... But... But the OP wasn't talking about increasing the price of an existing MMO... Mr. Narius
He was talking about a new super MMO with "super" features, features that no other MMO's has currently and charging 35.00 dollars monthly for it.
It's understood that it's not the most popular model due to the fact that "Free" has been popular for thousands of years.
But you can't charge more money for whats currently on the market. The game you are playing right now is most likely similar to another game that's currently in the market. So you see Mr. Narius it would make no sense to pay 35.00 for such a game however, if there was a new spectacular game with new features that can't be found in other games, it could justify a sub fee of 35 dollars.
Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
Yeah, it is funny. Except WoW, no sub-only game is successful even at $15. Thinking raising the price is the way to go .... seems very disconnected with basic economics.
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
and once upon a time, playing Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to today's MMO, cost $2 PER HOUR.
I think the world changes everyday.
But... But... But the OP wasn't talking about increasing the price of an existing MMO... Mr. Narius
He was talking about a new super MMO with "super" features, features that no other MMO's has currently and charging 35.00 dollars monthly for it.
It's understood that it's not the most popular model due to the fact that "Free" has been popular for thousands of years.
But you can't charge more money for whats currently on the market. The game you are playing right now is most likely similar to another game that's currently in the market. So you see Mr. Narius it would make no sense to pay 35.00 for such a game however, if there was a new spectacular game with new features that can't be found in other games, it could justify a sub fee of 35 dollars.
well that "spectacular" game does not exist yet, does it?
It is totally irrelevant to talk about something that does not exist. This is no difference in saying if I can make a hot robot girl that is better than a real girl, guys will line up paying a $1M for it.
I can't imagine what "super" feature in a game that will make me want to pay even a $15 sub .. not to mention $35. And nothing I have seen in this thread suggest there will be anything that will be more fun than a F2P to me.
Again, all a matter of opinion. For some of us, $30-35 a month is absolutely worth it so long as the game provides adequate entertainment.
Yes .. it is a matter of opinion. Given there is so much adequate (for me, adequate is subjective) entertainment out there that is free, mere "adequate entertainment" does not worth $35 a month to me. Heck not even $10 a month.
It is actually kind of sad. A good movie (like Age of Ultron) is worth $40+ for me (me, my son + a bag of candy) .. and that is 2.5 hours of entertainment but MMOs wouldn't even worth $10 a month. It really has something to say about the market.
Some people love in-game stores like myself. Not p2w stores but extras like mounts/styles/etc. Now, mmo I did pay for a sub for a long time was swg (star wars galaxies). Had everything I liked where I didn't need a store. With the current games out there they just don't offer or give opportunities like they used too. so, f2p games don't bother me that much like a lot of other paying sub peeps.
Personally I don't know why it turns people off. You still technically can sub to some of these f2p games to show "support" or hell spend your 15 dollars a month on in-game store currency still get the same effect... supporting the game you enjoy. That's really all your money is going too. No superior game mode if you give your money. Before all these f2p games you normally have to wait for new content like new mounts or whatever but with store that f2p games have brought the content for that type of items is unlimited.
A man who fears nothing is a man who loves nothing; and if you love nothing, what joy is there in your life?
Originally posted by Buttski I had to laugh pretty hard at the OP thinking that a 35$ a month game would be successful
Yeah, it is funny. Except WoW, no sub-only game is successful even at $15. Thinking raising the price is the way to go .... seems very disconnected with basic economics.
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
and once upon a time, playing Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to today's MMO, cost $2 PER HOUR.
I think the world changes everyday.
But... But... But the OP wasn't talking about increasing the price of an existing MMO... Mr. Narius
He was talking about a new super MMO with "super" features, features that no other MMO's has currently and charging 35.00 dollars monthly for it.
It's understood that it's not the most popular model due to the fact that "Free" has been popular for thousands of years.
But you can't charge more money for whats currently on the market. The game you are playing right now is most likely similar to another game that's currently in the market. So you see Mr. Narius it would make no sense to pay 35.00 for such a game however, if there was a new spectacular game with new features that can't be found in other games, it could justify a sub fee of 35 dollars.
well that "spectacular" game does not exist yet, does it?
It is totally irrelevant to talk about something that does not exist. This is no difference in saying if I can make a hot robot girl that is better than a real girl, guys will line up paying a $1M for it.
I can't imagine what "super" feature in a game that will make me want to pay even a $15 sub .. not to mention $35. And nothing I have seen in this thread suggest there will be anything that will be more fun than a F2P to me.
But again, that is just me.
No sir, No it doesn't...
Just because something doesn't exist now doesn't mean it won't exist in the future. Besides half of these threads are about things that probably won't exist "AAA oldschool MMO's" and "AAA full loot perma-death MMO's" etc...
I think PvP and PvE players would benefit greatly from advanced NPC's. Games today pretty much have the same NPC's from 15 years ago. That's just one example...
35$/month for a game? Lol. In my country, 35$ is 1/5 of an average salary. And I'm pretty much sure there are plenty people in the god damn world that are working their a** of just to pay 15 bucks for FFXIV. No game is worth that much money. No matter how the game entertaining would be, 35$ per month is a heck load of money. FFS you can buy food for like 3 days or something. Hell, I'm even thinking that FFXIV or WoW are expensive games. There are like hundreds of MMOs out there and each of them offers something different. Some people should really start looking a bit deeper into a game. I mean, so what if you have wowlike combat system. Look at the storyline, look at the art style of the game, the OST or whatever not. They're all different and every game is fun in their own way and many of them are f2p. And yeah, the term "wow killer", why are people still using that term? I'm pretty much sure, that no company aims to make a game that would simply 'kill' a game that's like forever in the MMO industry.
Again, all a matter of opinion. For some of us, $30-35 a month is absolutely worth it so long as the game provides adequate entertainment.
Yes .. it is a matter of opinion. Given there is so much adequate (for me, adequate is subjective) entertainment out there that is free, mere "adequate entertainment" does not worth $35 a month to me. Heck not even $10 a month.
It is actually kind of sad. A good movie (like Age of Ultron) is worth $40+ for me (me, my son + a bag of candy) .. and that is 2.5 hours of entertainment but MMOs wouldn't even worth $10 a month. It really has something to say about the market.
Actually, you couldn't be more correct. The market does indeed reflect what we are paying for. So it seems, when you want everything for free, such as in a F2P MMO, you certainly get what you pay for, which is a golden pile of dung. As I stated before, anything similar to SWG or now ArcheAge, games with tons of features, that I personally would pay $30-35 a month for it. As it is right now, with ArcheAge being B2P with a stupid cash shop, we have turned what was once an awesome game during Founder's Alpha into one of the biggest letdowns in MMO history.
"dung" "let down" ... are all subjective. All you are saying is that you don't like the free games being offered now.
So what? Devs don't owe you a game you like. They can pursue whatever audience they want to in a free market.
Just because something doesn't exist now doesn't mean it won't exist in the future. Besides half of these threads are about things that probably won't exist "AAA oldschool MMO's" and "AAA full loot perma-death MMO's" etc...
I think PvP and PvE players would benefit greatly from advanced NPC's. Games today pretty much have the same NPC's from 15 years ago. That's just one example...
And it also does not mean that it will exist in the future .. just that you do not know. So aside from shooting breeze and having some fun debating ... something that no one knows if it will exists in the future .. is still irrelevant to gaming today.
BTW, i don't think pvp would benefit from advanced NPCs .. because in pvp, you fight other players, not NPCs, by definition.
Its funny how so many gamers think because a game is more expensive it is automatically better.......A higher monthly does not make the game better lol
Originally posted by Theocritus Its funny how so many gamers think because a game is more expensive it is automatically better.......A higher monthly does not make the game better lol
And better is subjective.
In fact, for me, the "best" MMO is marvel heroes .. a f2p game.
Just because something doesn't exist now doesn't mean it won't exist in the future. Besides half of these threads are about things that probably won't exist "AAA oldschool MMO's" and "AAA full loot perma-death MMO's" etc...
I think PvP and PvE players would benefit greatly from advanced NPC's. Games today pretty much have the same NPC's from 15 years ago. That's just one example...
And it also does not mean that it will exist in the future .. just that you do not know. So aside from shooting breeze and having some fun debating ... something that no one knows if it will exists in the future .. is still irrelevant to gaming today.
BTW, i don't think pvp would benefit from advanced NPCs .. because in pvp, you fight other players, not NPCs, by definition.
I was thinking beyond the typical scope of how PvE'ers see PvP.
Something along the lines of hired hands to assist with farming or mining but intelligent enough to know when to run if it senses danger or can tell the difference from "useless ore" and valuable ones. NPC's to accompany players on hunting parties without having to babysit like you would with traditional "Pet classes". NPC's that can properly guard a horse and carriage full of valuable goods on it's way to the castle without being tricked by players. What if NPC's were diverse enough to engage in politics with players, making clever moves within the kingdom...
If all you can do in-game is kill other people it gets old.. Better NPC's will open up the path to better games.
Comments
Once upon a time Everquest was 9.99 monthly and they raised their rate to 14.99.
Could you imagine the outrage over 5 bucks if this were to happen today...
I spent on average $30-40 a month on WOT for about 6 months before I burned out and I was a small fish in that pond as I never bought gold ammo. That was what it took just to convert elite XP to general XP and buy the occasional gold tank here and there. There are lots and lots of people out their right now spending that or more each month on their game of choice.
This thread is a perfect example of why F2P is so successful. You tell people that a game has a $35 sub and they will lose their minds. You tell people that a game is F2P and they will fall all over themselves spending hundreds or thousands monthly/weekly or even on a founder's pack for an unreleased game.
I dunno, the human brain just has a gap when it hits the word "free". "Yes I did spend $500 in this game, but it's F2P so it's not like I HAD to do it, I just wanted to." "OMG $35/mo? WTF! No game is worth $35/mo, not even Star Citizen! Well except for the Javelin ship, it is worth $2,500 - but not $35/mo." And that, in a nutshell, is the reality game developers are faced with. Complete and utter cognitive dissonance of the player base.
I laughed too hard!
Rofl. Who says wow is worth it? That's a matter of opinion.
I have no problem with a monthly $15 sub at all. I'd rather pay monthly and have access to the total game than play f2p and be blocked from certain things. Not to mention, I don't like the attitude that f2p has brought with it.
That being said, $35 a month is way too much money for any game out there at the moment. I'd be wiling to pay $20 or maybe even $25 BUT in exchange I want the following things...
1. A written contract from the gaming company that they will NEVER at any time go f2p or add an item mall that costs real life money.
2. That housing is NOT a "we might get to it later" idea but a reality on release.
3. That housing doesn't have "hooks" but is good housing like in EQ2 and SWG. You should be able to place anything anywhere in the house, break out of the house confines, and be able ot place anything on the x,y,z axis.
4. That it has GOOD crafting. This click and done stuff needs to end. People should be able to level just crafting alone and actually be involved in the crafting of an object. That being said, it shouldn't take more than a few minutes to create something either. And -I- should be the one crafting, not send my companion off to do it ala SWTOR (one of the worst systems I've ever seen) where it costs an arm and a leg to do it.
4. A sandbox game, meaning that I have a place in the world and involvement in it without having it be a theme park from end to end.
5. PvP is NEVER required but totally optional.
6. Get rid of the leveling system but find alternative advancements for the game.
7. Give me more to do than just theme park questing and raiding, and pvp. Collections and more.
8. Make the world responsive to what players do. Meaning, start us all as neutral characters and let our choices through the game determine what happens, then make the npc's react to us in that way. It should effect what quests we can get from certain points in the game. And make the choices more than just black, white and gray, make them morally complicated just like in real life.
9. Stop making it so that every single player, npc, mob, etc knows EXACTLY whether you are good, bad or neutral within seconds of talking to you and where the arrow is coming from. Seriously, in real life, if someone is sitting in the trees or behind a building, do you know in a half second EXACTLY where the arrow or gunshot is coming from? Really? A distance mob should not immediately know to run directly to YOU when there are 10 other people around so they can fight you in melee.
10. That brings me to the final thing. Mobs should be more intelligent. Just because I walk within a bears reach should NOT immediately mean that the bear is going to attack me. Defend itself if I attack, yes. Growl a warning, yes. But immediately attack just because I'm 100 feet away? Not going to happen. At that distance, it would run away if it had any option whatsoever.
There's probably more but this is a good start. If a game wants me to pay more money, then they need to up the ante. Give me more.
I actually have a really interesting video that explains why people do this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pxb5lSPLy9c
You have a very good point but I think it's a bit more complicated that that. People do have a disconnect between when someone tells them something is free and if it really is free but people also have this need for instant gratification. When you spend $2500 on a ship in SC you get at least a piece of that ship right away. When you spend $15 a month on a sub what you are getting is a little harder to describe much less fee excited about. Sure that first time you install the game and start to play it's there but over time that fades and the value for that recurring fee is harder to justify. That's why all subscription games do auto renewal and try to make the process as easy to forget about as possible.
One of the reasons gambling boxes are so popular is that they fit into human nature so well. You get a item that you can open for a "prize" right away getting both the excitement of buying something and the excitement from potentially beating the odds. Even when you lose you still have the desire to try again and again hoping to finally "hit it big".
I hate what F2P has done to how we play MMO's but even so it's a payment model that fits how the average human brain is wired a lot better than subscriptions ever where.
and once upon a time, playing Kingdom of Drakkar, a precursor to today's MMO, cost $2 PER HOUR.
I think the world changes everyday.
For $35 a month the game better be damn good. Now, $20 or $25 would work. The $15 sub from vanilla Wow and EQ would be something like that in todays money and it worked fine for them but you would cut out a large part of the possibly players with $35, student for example have a tight a budget and while they could pay that money if they were hooked most of them would not try the game out.
So you either would have to focus your game on older players with jobs or figure out some other thing to make it worth for students and teens to put that much of their monthly income on a single game.
It is true that a great MMO would be worth $35 a month, at least for me but with the competitionthe game you make needs to be awesome, and it needs to be constantly updated and have zero microtransactions.
Putting the fee at $25 would probably generate more cash in any case since you will get more players for that.
Price is irrelevant if the product has quality people will pay it. People fork over $500-750 every 2 years for a new iphone. If someone actually made a quality MMO where it was obvious your sub fee was going into the game and not the pockets of the investors people would be willing to pay for that sub.
Do you know what the problem with MMOs ? These companies have investors thinking they can get rich fast by making a wow clone. You pay $15 a month for that wow clone but how much of that goes back into the game ? Probably a fraction of it.
But... But... But the OP wasn't talking about increasing the price of an existing MMO... Mr. Narius
He was talking about a new super MMO with "super" features, features that no other MMO's has currently and charging 35.00 dollars monthly for it.
It's understood that it's not the most popular model due to the fact that "Free" has been popular for thousands of years.
But you can't charge more money for whats currently on the market. The game you are playing right now is most likely similar to another game that's currently in the market. So you see Mr. Narius it would make no sense to pay 35.00 for such a game however, if there was a new spectacular game with new features that can't be found in other games, it could justify a sub fee of 35 dollars.
$35 is too much !..FFXIV is doing fine
For $35 a month, I could buy a console game EVERY MONTH, I would easily pick the console game instead.
way too much money
well that "spectacular" game does not exist yet, does it?
It is totally irrelevant to talk about something that does not exist. This is no difference in saying if I can make a hot robot girl that is better than a real girl, guys will line up paying a $1M for it.
I can't imagine what "super" feature in a game that will make me want to pay even a $15 sub .. not to mention $35. And nothing I have seen in this thread suggest there will be anything that will be more fun than a F2P to me.
But again, that is just me.
Yes .. it is a matter of opinion. Given there is so much adequate (for me, adequate is subjective) entertainment out there that is free, mere "adequate entertainment" does not worth $35 a month to me. Heck not even $10 a month.
It is actually kind of sad. A good movie (like Age of Ultron) is worth $40+ for me (me, my son + a bag of candy) .. and that is 2.5 hours of entertainment but MMOs wouldn't even worth $10 a month. It really has something to say about the market.
Some people love in-game stores like myself. Not p2w stores but extras like mounts/styles/etc. Now, mmo I did pay for a sub for a long time was swg (star wars galaxies). Had everything I liked where I didn't need a store. With the current games out there they just don't offer or give opportunities like they used too. so, f2p games don't bother me that much like a lot of other paying sub peeps.
Personally I don't know why it turns people off. You still technically can sub to some of these f2p games to show "support" or hell spend your 15 dollars a month on in-game store currency still get the same effect... supporting the game you enjoy. That's really all your money is going too. No superior game mode if you give your money. Before all these f2p games you normally have to wait for new content like new mounts or whatever but with store that f2p games have brought the content for that type of items is unlimited.
A man who fears nothing is a man who loves nothing; and if you love nothing, what joy is there in your life?
No sir, No it doesn't...
Just because something doesn't exist now doesn't mean it won't exist in the future. Besides half of these threads are about things that probably won't exist "AAA oldschool MMO's" and "AAA full loot perma-death MMO's" etc...
I think PvP and PvE players would benefit greatly from advanced NPC's. Games today pretty much have the same NPC's from 15 years ago. That's just one example...
"dung" "let down" ... are all subjective. All you are saying is that you don't like the free games being offered now.
So what? Devs don't owe you a game you like. They can pursue whatever audience they want to in a free market.
And it also does not mean that it will exist in the future .. just that you do not know. So aside from shooting breeze and having some fun debating ... something that no one knows if it will exists in the future .. is still irrelevant to gaming today.
BTW, i don't think pvp would benefit from advanced NPCs .. because in pvp, you fight other players, not NPCs, by definition.
And better is subjective.
In fact, for me, the "best" MMO is marvel heroes .. a f2p game.
I was thinking beyond the typical scope of how PvE'ers see PvP.
Something along the lines of hired hands to assist with farming or mining but intelligent enough to know when to run if it senses danger or can tell the difference from "useless ore" and valuable ones. NPC's to accompany players on hunting parties without having to babysit like you would with traditional "Pet classes". NPC's that can properly guard a horse and carriage full of valuable goods on it's way to the castle without being tricked by players. What if NPC's were diverse enough to engage in politics with players, making clever moves within the kingdom...
If all you can do in-game is kill other people it gets old.. Better NPC's will open up the path to better games.
I'm a hardcore pvp'er btw