One MMO (WoW) had a shot to go the more than $15 a month route and even they wouldnt go there...They had the player base and the quality of game to attempt it and they passed.... Obviously they have done their research and the risk was too great to go more expensive.... I just dont see any possible video game that can command that kind of money, especially a MMO.
Most video games "command that"... Folks pay $60 for a console game that they play for a few weeks...
Games like The Order sold millions of copies.. and that game had a documented 5 hour walkthough of the whole game...
Many MMO players will do that in one sitting...
They already are playing pay to win games.
For you, that's not the problem. The problem for you is most likely no game is good enough.
And let us be realistic here. You are expecting a game far better than any 15$ subscription games or any f2p games currently on the market. Easier said than done.
No, again you misstate things to try to re-cast the argument.
Again I contend that there is a base of players who are willing to pay more than a measly $15 a month for a game was has no cash shop/RMT/F2P cheese and instituted some premium features such as more active GMs. This is not a really hard or revolutionary concept. It's actually a throwback to how things used to be.
For the record.. $15 in 1995 is equal to about $25 today ($24.19 but close enough).
I totally would, so did another guy who said they'll pay more for a non cash shop version of archage.
The problem isn't developer staying with the 15$ subscription. The problem is almost every game is cash shop game now.
Is there any Open World MMO in the making that has not yet been released?
Bless Online - Where are the NA Open World MMOs? I have to rely on Korea to produce them... I couldn't wait for Bless Online... After years of waiting... CANCELED.
Bwahahahaha--.. ahem... sorry mate. You have to re-teach yourself what a good game is if you are pinning your hopes on such blatantly obvious pieces of sh!t like Bless and Lineage Eternal.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
Just about every one of your posts falls into one or more of these statements:
I'm not like other gamers.
I don't understand why people like AAA MMOs, cash shops, or the grind. I'm so amazing because I don't.
No one can understand what I'm going through. I can't understand why people don't sympathize with my choice to go on and on about indie early access games.
No one understands me.
I just don't understand why I come to these forums anymore. It's just full of a bunch of mindless mainstream MMO players.
To everyone reading my posts: I don't like when you disagree with me so please refrain from doing that so I don't have to see it.
Indie games are my life. Early access is my life. I'm just so sick of all the AAA fakes out there.
God I hate it when new fans like something mainstream. They're so dumb.
I think something some people miss is that cancelled games are at least admitting there is no solid game to be had.Other more lame developers will still try and release a pile of trash and gladly sell it to us through promises and tricky marketing,you know like sending word to a site like this to try and convince us the game is good. Have we EVER seen a website making money off of developers tell us a game is not worth playing,is poorly designed to utter trash?NEVER which is why the integrity of website reviews is BS and not worth a look. So my point is that i think we should at least give some devs credit for cancelling a game and not trying to peddle some crap version onto us.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
What is a premium game in this sense? IF you can't describe what's worth 50 to you, how do you expect a dev to? And this has nothing to do with what I like or don't like....
This is about marketability. SO what sets a game apart to be worth more than double the current asking price of $15 a month ($50)? Obviously no company has figured this out yet as they have a hard time meeting what you view as worth $15..... I'm pretty sure ESO's devs thought they made a premium product, as have every single dev that came before. Obviously they didn't
Secondly you're only one person, I'm only one person, if neither of us like F2P titles, that means jack squat in the grand scheme...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
The thing is the more subscription cost the less player would be. So in the end the game company won't necessary make more money.
There's a reason why almost all the game on the market are f2p. So people that are willing to pay the high money can do so.
F2P players who spend nothing on the game are simply there to provide content to people who do pay.
Again, if you are happy with current games and monetization that's great. I don't want to stop F2P games. I'd simply like a choice for a premium game at a premium price.
Me too but in the end no company believe it'll work. The reality is why stop there charge 100$ per month or 500$ per month.
Many people are already paying that in f2p games. So why charge 25-50 when they can charge people more in f2p games.
Because.. as I (and others above) have stated a few times... I think there is a market of people that will pay $25 or even $49 a month for a premium game without the F2P/cash shop/pay for advantage stuff. I'd happily pay $49 a month for a premium game but you know how much I have spent on cash shop/F2P games? ZERO. Not a cent. Do i think I'm in the majority? No, but I do believe there are more of us than you may think. So a developer can aim to be number 1298 F2P game, or aim to stand out from the competition by delivering something different.
Again though, it's not just paying a sub that magically makes the game better. I want a premium product to match that. Maybe much more active GMs, some live events... something that makes it a premium product.
Right but you are assuming the game will be better if companies charge more. But the more companies charge, the less players there will be. So they won't necessary money.
So what justification is that the game should be better just because they charge 25 or 50$.
The worst part about such, what I'd call fantasies. Is that ESO, SWTOR, and so many others started off as P2P with no cash shop, in ESO's case it had a lot of as well as diverse range in terms of content. Still many decried it as not enough to justify the monthly price tag. As it's not a matter of what any individual game offers, as much as it's about what the entire market does. When the going price for lot's of content, is Zero.... results like ESO's are what you get. B2P or F2P.
You need a shelf life like WOW's to get most to pay a sub in this day and age (or a powerful IP guiding it's fandom), and no new game is going to match that breadth of content.
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
I get what you're trying to say here man. I definitely do. I think the point he is making that you are missing is. People bitch and moan about chump change like $15 a month. Other than WoW and FF14, what other P2P mmo is still going? It's not really the quality of the mmos imo. It's the fact that you have a lot of options, and when a lot of people see they can play mmos for basically free. It's really going to be hard to convince them to pay even more than $15.
If there was a really amazing, next generation mmo. Something I have never seen. I would go as far as maybe $20-$25. But I know I'm in the minority here.
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
What is a premium game in this sense? IF you can't describe what's worth 50 to you, how do you expect a dev to? And this has nothing to do with what I like or don't like....
This is about marketability. SO what sets a game apart to be worth more than double the current asking price of $15 a month ($50)? Obviously no company has figured this out yet as they have a hard time meeting what you view as worth $15..... I'm pretty sure ESO's devs thought they made a premium product, as have every single dev that came before. Obviously they didn't
Secondly you're only one person, I'm only one person, if neither of us like F2P titles, that means jack squat in the grand scheme...
I don't think it would take too much to make a "premium" MMO worth subscribing to. Many of the releases of the last 5 years come relatively close, but all tend to fail in some fundamental capacity.
ESO This game had a ton of content, loads of story and character development, great crafting / economy and a good mix of pvp and pve. However, the combat is really shallow so engagement is low (this is the main reason I and my friends didn't stick with it), the expectations of the IP (open world sandbox) didn't match the actual game (standard themepark), the megaserver technology, at least initially, made grouping up a pain in the ass. Then there was a pointless CP grind at endgame.
If Zenimax had managed to keep the Elder Scrolls feeling to the game from launch, given it some deeper combat mechanics etc then I think it would have been a lot more successful. They've proven that they can continue to develop new content for the game which, imo, is a key factor in being able to charge a subscription. They just made some questionable decisions during development.
My initial thoughts on a ticklist for a premium MMO would be:
Great IP - I have to want to live in this world
6 months worth of themepark content - average player should take 6 months to work through all quests and complete all dungeons.
Some sandbox features - even if it's just crafting and pvp, there needs to be something to do once you've completed the themepark
Depth - you don't want your players getting bored so there needs to be suitable depth, both in terms of gameplay and the meta game.
Socialising - the developers need to have actually put decent thought into how to promote a great community. Guilds, hobbies, group content, alliances, interdependancy .
Regular content updates - ultimately, this is where our money is going, so I would say a significant update every 2 months is a good schedule to aim for. A new raid, new battlegrounds, new zones, new classes etc.
A lot of MMOs come close. Depth is what I usually find lacking, for example, SW:TOR was so god damn easy to play it was just really boring. No challenge in that game at all, nearly everything was a gear check.
Socialising is also an issue, too many MMO devs seem to forget the massively-multiplayer part, so you have a very solo orientated experience and don't form the social bonds required to keep you in game.
Then there is the content issue. Too many games, you can either blast through the content in weeks, or the content is just a pointlessly long grind. Due to retention issues, devs then don't have the money to reliably develop new content.
So, when I played SW:TOR at launch for example, I hit the cap in a couple of weeks, then completed all raids within another couple of weeks. I essentially had 1 months worth of content, then from then on I was just repeating the same small amount of content (pvp and raids) for months on end.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
The thing is the more subscription cost the less player would be. So in the end the game company won't necessary make more money.
There's a reason why almost all the game on the market are f2p. So people that are willing to pay the high money can do so.
F2P players who spend nothing on the game are simply there to provide content to people who do pay.
Again, if you are happy with current games and monetization that's great. I don't want to stop F2P games. I'd simply like a choice for a premium game at a premium price.
Me too but in the end no company believe it'll work. The reality is why stop there charge 100$ per month or 500$ per month.
Many people are already paying that in f2p games. So why charge 25-50 when they can charge people more in f2p games.
Because.. as I (and others above) have stated a few times... I think there is a market of people that will pay $25 or even $49 a month for a premium game without the F2P/cash shop/pay for advantage stuff. I'd happily pay $49 a month for a premium game but you know how much I have spent on cash shop/F2P games? ZERO. Not a cent. Do i think I'm in the majority? No, but I do believe there are more of us than you may think. So a developer can aim to be number 1298 F2P game, or aim to stand out from the competition by delivering something different.
Again though, it's not just paying a sub that magically makes the game better. I want a premium product to match that. Maybe much more active GMs, some live events... something that makes it a premium product.
Right but you are assuming the game will be better if companies charge more. But the more companies charge, the less players there will be. So they won't necessary money.
So what justification is that the game should be better just because they charge 25 or 50$.
The worst part about such, what I'd call fantasies. Is that ESO, SWTOR, and so many others started off as P2P with no cash shop, in ESO's case it had a lot of as well as diverse range in terms of content. Still many decried it as not enough to justify the monthly price tag. As it's not a matter of what any individual game offers, as much as it's about what the entire market does. When the going price for lot's of content, is Zero.... results like ESO's are what you get. B2P or F2P.
You need a shelf life like WOW's to get most to pay a sub in this day and age (or a powerful IP guiding it's fandom), and no new game is going to match that breadth of content.
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
I get what you're trying to say here man. I definitely do. I think the point he is making that you are missing is. People bitch and moan about chump change like $15 a month. Other than WoW and FF14, what other P2P mmo is still going? It's not really the quality of the mmos imo. It's the fact that you have a lot of options, and when a lot of people see they can play mmos for basically free. It's really going to be hard to convince them to pay even more than $15.
If there was a really amazing, next generation mmo. Something I have never seen. I would go as far as maybe $20-$25. But I know I'm in the minority here.
EVE is still P2P if you actually want to play the full game. They can do this by offering its players an experience they can't get elsewhere.
In some ways WOW and FFXIV are doing much the same, providing some unique features which appeals to their much larger niches.
ESOs initial failure was in not providing a unique Elder scrolls experience and instead creating standard themepark #135 which was not worth a sub fee for many.
The secret is to offer something not found elsewhere and the niche will pay well for it.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
Just about every one of your posts falls into one or more of these statements:
I'm not like other gamers.
....
In your first 5 words you represent something I dont feel about myself and dont recall saying. However even if i did, its not special snowflake. being in the minority is NOT special snowflake. Special snowflake is playing a game and thinking you are the only person on the entire planet that has as radical highly differential experience from what they normally have.
Being a minority is NOT special snowflake.
Now..when people talk the VAST MAJORITY of the time neither side has all the facts and this is very often true for all conversations on all topics. So how does one take a position? Well they take it based on personal experience and what they feel to be a statically more likelihood that they are correct.
For one side of a debate to make assertions without facts and then expect the other side to make assertions only when they have facts is called being a hypocrite. Something to chew on when one suggests to me 'how do I know most people have not tried those games' well, what evidence of fact is he making that assertion (which he is implicitly by asking the inverse)?
What does my gut tell me? My gut tells me that most people on this forum have not tried the games i have refered to, dont know what those games are and dont care because what is more important is the pitty party
Post edited by SEANMCAD on
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
Reading his posts hurts my brain. Kyleran am I alone in this?
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
Well statistically, 30% of statistics are created because they 'look right' although 70% of statisticians are statistically unable to differentiate between extrapolated calculations based on surveys, or unrelated data gathered by other means (guesswork!) of course of these 5% of statistics are likely to be accurate, because nobody guesses wrong answers all the time, right ?
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
Well statistically, 30% of statistics are created because they 'look right' although 70% of statisticians are statistically unable to differentiate between extrapolated calculations based on surveys, or unrelated data gathered by other means (guesswork!) of course of these 5% of statistics are likely to be accurate, because nobody guesses wrong answers all the time, right ?
'statistically' speaking it is nearly impossible for one gamer to have a unique experience
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
no which is the whole point, 'statistically speaking' its not possible for a person to be a special snowflake
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
no which is the whole point, 'statistically speaking' its not possible for a person to be a special snowflake
Statistically speaking we are not all exactly the same so we are all special snowflakes
Same with EVE, a huge portion of players don't even go to nullsec and stay in high sec.
Since when? I stopped playing a few months back (not by choice, stupid life) and I could not even get in a decent Corp unless I was willing to hang in Nullsec (which I was, and is where I spent the majority of my time) and that is where I saw most people heading. OR low sec anyway, it just is not profitable to be in high sec. You are going to get ganked regardless, you may as well make some money before you do.
Like I said I quit playing before F2P went live so things easily could have changed.
I tried to find the reference but my GoogleFu has failed me. I thought the statistic was mentioned by CCP in one of the 2017 Fanfest presentations that at least half of the player base lives and stays in high security space.
So why is finding a hisec corp next to impossible? Because being in one is absolutely horrific thanks to the utterly broken wardec mechanic. How broken is it? The hands-down best way to deal with wardecs is to either not play or drop corp until the wardeccer gets bored and drops the war.
If you ignore it you'll get killed by the gatecamps when you try to get to market. If you try to fight you'll either be completely outclassed or they'll just run and hide. And really, if you're big enough to fight them, then you're big enough to live in null-sec where you can PvE in peace.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
no which is the whole point, 'statistically speaking' its not possible for a person to be a special snowflake
Statistically speaking we are not all exactly the same so we are all special snowflakes
statistically speaking your assertion is actually not accurate according to my understanding on science and biology
but I will say you are pushing extra hard to promote the theory of special snowflake even to the point of maybe suggesting its fairly common
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
besides....isnt there a HUGE difference between 'there is a slight very small minor chance that it could be true' and ' weighing between two options it doesnt matter which is statistically more likely because they both 'can' be true and I like the one that is less likely more'.....said the special snowflake
I feel safe in saying its HIGHLY unlikely to near impossible that nobody other than me have multiple times had the experience I have had and I think suggesting that its actually even somewhat likely is being delusional. Understand this didnt happen just once, its happen multiple times
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
What is a premium game in this sense? IF you can't describe what's worth 50 to you, how do you expect a dev to? And this has nothing to do with what I like or don't like....
This is about marketability. SO what sets a game apart to be worth more than double the current asking price of $15 a month ($50)? Obviously no company has figured this out yet as they have a hard time meeting what you view as worth $15..... I'm pretty sure ESO's devs thought they made a premium product, as have every single dev that came before. Obviously they didn't
Secondly you're only one person, I'm only one person, if neither of us like F2P titles, that means jack squat in the grand scheme...
I don't think it would take too much to make a "premium" MMO worth subscribing to. Many of the releases of the last 5 years come relatively close, but all tend to fail in some fundamental capacity.
ESO This game had a ton of content, loads of story and character development, great crafting / economy and a good mix of pvp and pve. However, the combat is really shallow so engagement is low (this is the main reason I and my friends didn't stick with it), the expectations of the IP (open world sandbox) didn't match the actual game (standard themepark), the megaserver technology, at least initially, made grouping up a pain in the ass. Then there was a pointless CP grind at endgame.
If Zenimax had managed to keep the Elder Scrolls feeling to the game from launch, given it some deeper combat mechanics etc then I think it would have been a lot more successful. They've proven that they can continue to develop new content for the game which, imo, is a key factor in being able to charge a subscription. They just made some questionable decisions during development.
My initial thoughts on a ticklist for a premium MMO would be:
Great IP - I have to want to live in this world
6 months worth of themepark content - average player should take 6 months to work through all quests and complete all dungeons.
Some sandbox features - even if it's just crafting and pvp, there needs to be something to do once you've completed the themepark
Depth - you don't want your players getting bored so there needs to be suitable depth, both in terms of gameplay and the meta game.
Socialising - the developers need to have actually put decent thought into how to promote a great community. Guilds, hobbies, group content, alliances, interdependancy .
Regular content updates - ultimately, this is where our money is going, so I would say a significant update every 2 months is a good schedule to aim for. A new raid, new battlegrounds, new zones, new classes etc.
A lot of MMOs come close. Depth is what I usually find lacking, for example, SW:TOR was so god damn easy to play it was just really boring. No challenge in that game at all, nearly everything was a gear check.
Socialising is also an issue, too many MMO devs seem to forget the massively-multiplayer part, so you have a very solo orientated experience and don't form the social bonds required to keep you in game.
Then there is the content issue. Too many games, you can either blast through the content in weeks, or the content is just a pointlessly long grind. Due to retention issues, devs then don't have the money to reliably develop new content.
So, when I played SW:TOR at launch for example, I hit the cap in a couple of weeks, then completed all raids within another couple of weeks. I essentially had 1 months worth of content, then from then on I was just repeating the same small amount of content (pvp and raids) for months on end.
The problem with the idea of a "premium" product like this is, it's an expectation of meeting perfection more or less, which is a huge gamble for such games. Almost an impossibility if it isn't one.
You're basically saying the problem with every game is there's always a downside to it. There's always something that's sacrificed to meet some other criteria. SO the premium game needs to adhere to every criteria with perfection. Otherwise it's not only not worth 50, it's not worth 15.
Can you not see the glaring problem there? We're basically saying after losing 100's of millions by not reaching perfection for us, we expect you to now potentially lose even more in another attempt. Yet ever we wonder why this genre has been drying up :P....
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
What I would call a fantasy is the belief that you can get a premium product for nothing. You get what you pay for. I stopped playing ESO because I thought the RvRvR portion of the game was horrendous, not because I thought $15 was too much.
If you like whats out there.. that's fantastic! Enjoy! There will likely always be F2P games.
Some of us would pay a premium for a premium game. ESO was not a premium game at all. It was the same as every other game.
What is a premium game in this sense? IF you can't describe what's worth 50 to you, how do you expect a dev to? And this has nothing to do with what I like or don't like....
This is about marketability. SO what sets a game apart to be worth more than double the current asking price of $15 a month ($50)? Obviously no company has figured this out yet as they have a hard time meeting what you view as worth $15..... I'm pretty sure ESO's devs thought they made a premium product, as have every single dev that came before. Obviously they didn't
Secondly you're only one person, I'm only one person, if neither of us like F2P titles, that means jack squat in the grand scheme...
I don't think it would take too much to make a "premium" MMO worth subscribing to. Many of the releases of the last 5 years come relatively close, but all tend to fail in some fundamental capacity.
ESO This game had a ton of content, loads of story and character development, great crafting / economy and a good mix of pvp and pve. However, the combat is really shallow so engagement is low (this is the main reason I and my friends didn't stick with it), the expectations of the IP (open world sandbox) didn't match the actual game (standard themepark), the megaserver technology, at least initially, made grouping up a pain in the ass. Then there was a pointless CP grind at endgame.
If Zenimax had managed to keep the Elder Scrolls feeling to the game from launch, given it some deeper combat mechanics etc then I think it would have been a lot more successful. They've proven that they can continue to develop new content for the game which, imo, is a key factor in being able to charge a subscription. They just made some questionable decisions during development.
My initial thoughts on a ticklist for a premium MMO would be:
Great IP - I have to want to live in this world
6 months worth of themepark content - average player should take 6 months to work through all quests and complete all dungeons.
Some sandbox features - even if it's just crafting and pvp, there needs to be something to do once you've completed the themepark
Depth - you don't want your players getting bored so there needs to be suitable depth, both in terms of gameplay and the meta game.
Socialising - the developers need to have actually put decent thought into how to promote a great community. Guilds, hobbies, group content, alliances, interdependancy .
Regular content updates - ultimately, this is where our money is going, so I would say a significant update every 2 months is a good schedule to aim for. A new raid, new battlegrounds, new zones, new classes etc.
A lot of MMOs come close. Depth is what I usually find lacking, for example, SW:TOR was so god damn easy to play it was just really boring. No challenge in that game at all, nearly everything was a gear check.
Socialising is also an issue, too many MMO devs seem to forget the massively-multiplayer part, so you have a very solo orientated experience and don't form the social bonds required to keep you in game.
Then there is the content issue. Too many games, you can either blast through the content in weeks, or the content is just a pointlessly long grind. Due to retention issues, devs then don't have the money to reliably develop new content.
So, when I played SW:TOR at launch for example, I hit the cap in a couple of weeks, then completed all raids within another couple of weeks. I essentially had 1 months worth of content, then from then on I was just repeating the same small amount of content (pvp and raids) for months on end.
The problem with the idea of a "premium" product like this is, it's an expectation of meeting perfection more or less, which is a huge gamble for such games. Almost an impossibility if it isn't one.
You're basically saying the problem with every game is there's always a downside to it. There's always something that's sacrificed to meet some other criteria. SO the premium game needs to adhere to every criteria with perfection. Otherwise it's not only not worth 50, it's not worth 15.
Can you not see the glaring problem there? We're basically saying after losing 100's of millions by not reaching perfection for us, we expect you to now potentially lose even more in another attempt. Yet ever we wonder why this genre has been drying up :P....
I think the screaming question here is why do we (if 'we' do) think the pricing model for a game needs to be valued differently then every other product or service ever created.
or is there a similar thread between price paid and quality?
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
I am not a special snowflake who when I became introduced to the games I am talking about the effect was radical down to my DNA. I am sure many other gamers would have the same experience.
that is why
How would you possibly know that? You ran a survey? Talking to 10 friends does not count as statistical evidence.
how would I possibly know that I am not a special snowflake?
because its statistically not possible and that statistical impossibility becomes even more so when the emotional response is significantly different between two subjects rather than subtle.
I know a lot of people here believe in the special snowflake model but they need to learn more about statistics
also, 1. I never stated that it was a fact. thus when moving forward on a conversation one has to pick the more statistically plausible option which I feel I have done.
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
I already explain that answer.
Because I know I am not a special snowflake. I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Wait a minute, statistically speaking someone, somewhere has to be the "special snowflake."
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
no which is the whole point, 'statistically speaking' its not possible for a person to be a special snowflake
Statistically speaking we are not all exactly the same so we are all special snowflakes
statistically speaking your assertion is actually not accurate according to my understanding on science and biology
but I will say you are pushing extra hard to promote the theory of special snowflake even to the point of maybe suggesting its fairly common
No two DNA's are exactly the same. At least that's the reasoning and science behind evolution.
Also I wasn't pushing anything, when I use a wink emoji, you can use it as a signal that I'm being lighthearted or jesting.
I can use all the smiles and lightheartedness I can these days. I'm watching my father wither away in front of me, he's been stage four for a couple months. Down to the last few weeks now
Comments
The problem isn't developer staying with the 15$ subscription. The problem is almost every game is cash shop game now.
I'm not like other gamers.
I don't understand why people like AAA MMOs, cash shops, or the grind. I'm so amazing because I don't.
No one can understand what I'm going through. I can't understand why people don't sympathize with my choice to go on and on about indie early access games.
No one understands me.
I just don't understand why I come to these forums anymore. It's just full of a bunch of mindless mainstream MMO players.
To everyone reading my posts: I don't like when you disagree with me so please refrain from doing that so I don't have to see it.
Indie games are my life. Early access is my life. I'm just so sick of all the AAA fakes out there.
God I hate it when new fans like something mainstream. They're so dumb.
YEP, you're definitely a special snowflake.
~~ postlarval ~~
Have we EVER seen a website making money off of developers tell us a game is not worth playing,is poorly designed to utter trash?NEVER which is why the integrity of website reviews is BS and not worth a look.
So my point is that i think we should at least give some devs credit for cancelling a game and not trying to peddle some crap version onto us.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
This is about marketability. SO what sets a game apart to be worth more than double the current asking price of $15 a month ($50)? Obviously no company has figured this out yet as they have a hard time meeting what you view as worth $15..... I'm pretty sure ESO's devs thought they made a premium product, as have every single dev that came before. Obviously they didn't
Secondly you're only one person, I'm only one person, if neither of us like F2P titles, that means jack squat in the grand scheme...
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
If there was a really amazing, next generation mmo. Something I have never seen. I would go as far as maybe $20-$25. But I know I'm in the minority here.
ESO
This game had a ton of content, loads of story and character development, great crafting / economy and a good mix of pvp and pve. However, the combat is really shallow so engagement is low (this is the main reason I and my friends didn't stick with it), the expectations of the IP (open world sandbox) didn't match the actual game (standard themepark), the megaserver technology, at least initially, made grouping up a pain in the ass. Then there was a pointless CP grind at endgame.
If Zenimax had managed to keep the Elder Scrolls feeling to the game from launch, given it some deeper combat mechanics etc then I think it would have been a lot more successful. They've proven that they can continue to develop new content for the game which, imo, is a key factor in being able to charge a subscription. They just made some questionable decisions during development.
My initial thoughts on a ticklist for a premium MMO would be:
A lot of MMOs come close. Depth is what I usually find lacking, for example, SW:TOR was so god damn easy to play it was just really boring. No challenge in that game at all, nearly everything was a gear check.
Socialising is also an issue, too many MMO devs seem to forget the massively-multiplayer part, so you have a very solo orientated experience and don't form the social bonds required to keep you in game.
Then there is the content issue. Too many games, you can either blast through the content in weeks, or the content is just a pointlessly long grind. Due to retention issues, devs then don't have the money to reliably develop new content.
So, when I played SW:TOR at launch for example, I hit the cap in a couple of weeks, then completed all raids within another couple of weeks. I essentially had 1 months worth of content, then from then on I was just repeating the same small amount of content (pvp and raids) for months on end.
In some ways WOW and FFXIV are doing much the same, providing some unique features which appeals to their much larger niches.
ESOs initial failure was in not providing a unique Elder scrolls experience and instead creating standard themepark #135 which was not worth a sub fee for many.
The secret is to offer something not found elsewhere and the niche will pay well for it.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
In your first 5 words you represent something I dont feel about myself and dont recall saying. However even if i did, its not special snowflake. being in the minority is NOT special snowflake. Special snowflake is playing a game and thinking you are the only person on the entire planet that has as radical highly differential experience from what they normally have.
Being a minority is NOT special snowflake.
Now..when people talk the VAST MAJORITY of the time neither side has all the facts and this is very often true for all conversations on all topics. So how does one take a position? Well they take it based on personal experience and what they feel to be a statically more likelihood that they are correct.
For one side of a debate to make assertions without facts and then expect the other side to make assertions only when they have facts is called being a hypocrite. Something to chew on when one suggests to me 'how do I know most people have not tried those games' well, what evidence of fact is he making that assertion (which he is implicitly by asking the inverse)?
What does my gut tell me? My gut tells me that most people on this forum have not tried the games i have refered to, dont know what those games are and dont care because what is more important is the pitty party
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
No i mean how is it possible that you know "many other gamers would have the same experience".
I assume MANY here really means many ... not like the 20 or even the 100 people that you know. So again, did you run a survey on gamer experiences?
Because I know I am not a special snowflake.
I know its statistically not plausible for it to not be true. you however by contradiction seem to believe that its statistically likely that it IS true. I feel confident that you are wrong
so I think the answer to your question remains the same.
Statistics
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
If it's neither one of you two then clearly it must be....me!
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
I tried to find the reference but my GoogleFu has failed me. I thought the statistic was mentioned by CCP in one of the 2017 Fanfest presentations that at least half of the player base lives and stays in high security space.
So why is finding a hisec corp next to impossible? Because being in one is absolutely horrific thanks to the utterly broken wardec mechanic. How broken is it? The hands-down best way to deal with wardecs is to either not play or drop corp until the wardeccer gets bored and drops the war.
If you ignore it you'll get killed by the gatecamps when you try to get to market. If you try to fight you'll either be completely outclassed or they'll just run and hide. And really, if you're big enough to fight them, then you're big enough to live in null-sec where you can PvE in peace.
but I will say you are pushing extra hard to promote the theory of special snowflake even to the point of maybe suggesting its fairly common
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
~~ postlarval ~~
https://plus.maths.org/content/more-than-one
besides....isnt there a HUGE difference between 'there is a slight very small minor chance that it could be true' and ' weighing between two options it doesnt matter which is statistically more likely because they both 'can' be true and I like the one that is less likely more'.....said the special snowflake
I feel safe in saying its HIGHLY unlikely to near impossible that nobody other than me have multiple times had the experience I have had and I think suggesting that its actually even somewhat likely is being delusional. Understand this didnt happen just once, its happen multiple times
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
The problem with the idea of a "premium" product like this is, it's an expectation of meeting perfection more or less, which is a huge gamble for such games. Almost an impossibility if it isn't one.
You're basically saying the problem with every game is there's always a downside to it. There's always something that's sacrificed to meet some other criteria. SO the premium game needs to adhere to every criteria with perfection. Otherwise it's not only not worth 50, it's not worth 15.
Can you not see the glaring problem there? We're basically saying after losing 100's of millions by not reaching perfection for us, we expect you to now potentially lose even more in another attempt. Yet ever we wonder why this genre has been drying up :P....
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Also I wasn't pushing anything, when I use a wink emoji, you can use it as a signal that I'm being lighthearted or jesting.
I can use all the smiles and lightheartedness I can these days. I'm watching my father wither away in front of me, he's been stage four for a couple months. Down to the last few weeks now
Circle of life type things.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee