| 79 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
maskedweasel
Elite Member
Joined: 9/24/07
"Kids, try imagining how far the universe extends! Keep thinking about it until you go insane." |
Originally posted by Daffid011
For this to really take hold on the mmo market there needs to be something offered worth while for that change to take hold. Time will tell I guess, but I still see subscription based games holding their ground.
I think Subscription games will always have their place somewhere.. and not everyone will embrace a single payment type. Its shown that the guild wars model works with just purchasing the game. In fact, its been proven 10 times over as most online games on consoles use this model. You buy the game, you often play through the single player game, then you go online and play on their servers, purchase their download packs.. and so on. Now - no - many times they don't have immense persistent worlds, but you get the gist.
As much as I'd hate to say it even the MT models will probably take hold sometime or another..... I think what matters most about the payment models is how the games actually play. If something is good enough, people will pay for it. CO was never really good enough for having all 3 payment models... and I think a large amount of players know that.. If this game was no monthly sub and just the box and the MTs I bet you it would've done a lot better out of the gate. |
|
Ramonski7
 Elite Member
Joined: 5/21/03
"A wise man has something to say, but a fool just has to say something." |
I for one welcome this business model for DCUO. Some people have to understand that some games are going to be MMO Console Games and not MMORPGs in the traditional sense. And even though most PC users would adamantly deny that console gamers could cause such a influence, they are the ones that are steering this boat we call gaming.
I mean for years we have known that console gamers are far more profitable than PC gamers. And if you didn't, well at least the people making the games think so. Furthermore, now that this generation of consoles all support online access, usb ports and swappable HDs, it was only a matter of time that the last edge that PC gamers had over console users (MMOs) would slowly gravitate into their camp.
So it shouldn't really surprise anyone here that from time to time we will get companies that take even well known IPs and laying the groundwork for the possibility of porting that game to consoles in the future. If you can't grasp this basic trend, then prepare for a bumpy ride with more MMOs down the line.  "Small minds talk about people, average minds talk about events, great minds talk about ideas." |
Originally posted by Palebane it doesn't say free to install it doesn't say free to obtain it says free to PLAY
Seeing that a player is required to purchase of the game client/box/expansions to play guild wars, you cannot play guild wars for free. It has no subscription fee, but that does not make the game free to play. Slight difference, but a large enough to be a totally different revenue model. |
|
Originally posted by maskedweasel
I think Subscription games will always have their place somewhere.. and not everyone will embrace a single payment type. Its shown that the guild wars model works with just purchasing the game. In fact, its been proven 10 times over as most online games on consoles use this model. You buy the game, you often play through the single player game, then you go online and play on their servers, purchase their download packs.. and so on. Now - no - many times they don't have immense persistent worlds, but you get the gist.
As much as I'd hate to say it even the MT models will probably take hold sometime or another..... I think what matters most about the payment models is how the games actually play. If something is good enough, people will pay for it. CO was never really good enough for having all 3 payment models... and I think a large amount of players know that.. If this game was no monthly sub and just the box and the MTs I bet you it would've done a lot better out of the gate. Well said. I didn't mean to imply that only subscription based mmos will thrive.
That being said, I think for any new model to really take hold they have to offer a superior experience to what players have right now. I don't think any of the new revenue models are going to offer that for a sustainable amount of time. The hybrid of subscription/cash shop almost directly conflict with either models design process.
Subscription based games are encouraged to add free content for players to engage in. The longer players subscribe to the game, the more money companies will make, so it is in their best interest to keep players subscribing by adding new features and content. "free to play" games are usually supported by microtransactions. The more players spend the more companies make. It is in the best interest of the companies making the game to push players towards the cash shops. Either by removing content from the game or limiting access to it without some required cash shop purchases.
Subscription (even box sales/subscriptionless like diablo/guild wars) models seem to have found long term sustainable revenue streams to continue operation and expansion. So far I have my doubts about the long term viability of free to play games like this in the western market. Eventually they run out of fluff, cosmetic or non game impacting items to push players to the cash shops. To be sustainable they must have players continue buying RMT items. Soe has a monster of an IP license with the DC comics brand. Combine that with how much they are trying to gouge all of their current subscribers with additional RMT in almost everyone of their current mmos, I have to assume the DC model isn't going free to play so soe can make less than if they were to charge a flat subscription fee. My guess is they are planning to somehow average more than what they could make by just charging $15 a month per player.
|
|
Originally posted by Gravarg
I agree with the sub fees are at the end of their era but disagree with laying the "blame" on WoW.
The majority of people don't have 12 hours a day to grind on crap "kill 10 rats" hoping to get a rare drop or a spawn like the "good old days". This little thing called life and games are for recreation...unless you are a gold farmer....then its a job....the rest of you (not referring to you Gravarg...unless you fit the shoe) who think playing a video game for X amount of hours a day makes you hard core or somehow better...are....cool! Keep up the good work!!! The world needs more hard core gamers, you make my world go round, round baby round, round... Games, above all else, are about fun. MMORPG's are no different. If you are not having fun, find something else to do with your time and money and stop your bitchin. |
|
|
I hate F2P games. They have sorry support in the long run they cost more then P2P. Sic semper tyrannis "Democracy broke down, not when the Union |
|
|
Kyleran
 Elite Member
Joined: 9/13/06
"In EVE, no one gives a damn about a fair fight." - chafin |
Originally posted by shamus252
But they don't have to. F2P has long been associated with low budget asian grinders that appeal to player base that traditionally does not support subscription based gaming. That doens't mean there cannot be alternatives payment models that are good (GW's is one example) and result in good gameplay and support by the Developers. One article by an unknown author does not make anything a fact yet either, best to wait until they announce an official payment model before getting too excited about it.
"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 EVE Cult member since May 2007 Regarding EVE: "To be honest, I think God himself created this game." - Shek Regarding new players in EVE: "Think of yourself as a child released into a park full of pedophiles..." - Eleazaros |
|
Since Cryptic is being overly greedy by charging to purchase the game, AND charging a subscription, AND charging microtransactions on top (regardless of whether it is fluff or not) their greed may explode in their face. The reason being this; If DCUO does a GW model where you have a one time purchase, no subscription, and no micro transactions, what game is going to have a broader mass appeal? As long as DCUO has adequate content to compete with CO than they are the ones who will hit the home run. |
|
Originally posted by ethion
I can only see this happening if Champion Online fails to hold at least 100k+ active players... If it dips below this number I beleive they might swtich to the F2P model and add more stuff to there online store to sell, like powers, gear, special abilities, etc... Right now there going to try and have there cake and eat it to by using both models. If they add to many game affecting items in the store there is going to be a backlash because of the monthly fee there charging, so it's going to be a tricky balancing act.
|
|
Originally posted by Ramonski7
That's true, but in addition to 'more profitable' than PC gamers, console gamers are more controllable than PC gamers, and this is what the next generation of payment models and even games themselves are going to be about. Console games place the power solely in the hands of the content creator instead of the content purchaser, by locking down the system and granting the ability to charge for anything and everything. This will only get worse as the inevitable slide into digital downloads over physical media takes hold. PC gamers are a game dev's worst nightmare because they can mod their games and pirate their games. Console gamers (as a general rule) can't do this because it's much more of a hassle on a locked down platform. Console gaming is all about satisfying the game executive's thirst for complete control over their product, even after the sale. It's basically about turning people into renters instead of owners. |
|
|
This thread is laughable! Some piece of text full of "if"s and "maybe"s and you're sure it's F2P??? Even worse, you use the word "announces"?? How old are you, OP, 12? 8?
|
|
Originally posted by rsreston
Ha probably old enough to be your father :P 
|
|
|
Having seen the gameplay on gametrailers I cannot imagine this game being anything other than F2P. It is truely dismal.
A pity, but there you are.
|
|
|
I will not be playing DCUO because of this, regardless of how good the game is. And if CO changes to a microtransaction/F2P model, well, guess I'm stuck with EVE until KOTOR comes out. |
|
Originally posted by Daffid011
Seeing that a player is required to purchase of the game client/box/expansions to play guild wars, you cannot play guild wars for free. It has no subscription fee, but that does not make the game free to play. Slight difference, but a large enough to be a totally different revenue model.
If you get the box for Christmas, then it is completely free to play. However if you get WoW for christmas, you still have to PAY TO PLAY. The opposite of Pay to Play is Free to Play. Of course you are able to interpret that however you wish, but for me, if you don't have to pay money every month ( or any money at all after the point of purchase) then the game is Free to Play.
|
|
Originally posted by Horkathane
And the most ignorant comment of the year goes to..... Are we freer in America today? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWOW1OKzdNA |
|
Originally posted by Palebane
Someone purchasing the game box for you as a gift doesn't make the game free to play. I get what you are awkwardly trying to say, but they are not the same thing. A game with a retail price tag is not free. It may be subscription-free, but it is not free to play since there is an initial purchase required. A free to play game has no purchase required to play. It is usually supported by advertising or cash shops. Much different than the revenue model of diablo/guild wars.
It is important to keep those distinct, because they have very big differences in how the games are designed and operated. I still suspect DCU will have a retail box, subscription and a cash shop though.
|
|
Originally posted by Horkathane
GW peaked at 3 mil active users in the United States and Europe. F2p does work it just has to be good. |
|
Originally posted by Horkathane
Using the phrase "epic (fill in) should get you banned from the internet. Get a new line. When I said i had "time", i meant virtual time, i got no RL "time" for you. |
|
|
DeserttFoxx
 Advanced Member
Joined: 5/11/04
Cry Havok; and let loose the dogs of war. Acta Non Verba |
Originally posted by Horkathane
Guild wars seemed to work just fine... what the hell are you talking about? Life... is the shit that happens while you wait for moments that never come... ----- How come the people who hate World of Warcraft, never realize they are the minority? -------- |
|
DCUO Might as well go F2P, I hear they're using the GW model in that, there's like a central area where everyone gathers (cities etc.) and then the mission zones themselves are instanced like in GW where only you and your party can go to. So pretty much, you're playing GW, except that your'e a super hero instead of a fantasy character. CO on the other hand, the world is more open everyone can go everywhere and meet everyone else.
|
|
Originally posted by Horkathane
So then you're saying P2Ps are better-content-wise- than F2Ps? F2P or Microtransactions or MTs (for short) DO work in the US, as they should. I'd rather pay for a new upgrade than pay hundreds of dollars a year to play a game. I play a number of F2Ps who use MTs as a method of pay. Exteel is one that I haven't paid a single dime for, and probably never will, and it's still fun from time to time. Runes of Magic (RoM) has a fun little dual-class specialization that gives it an interesting spin and adds a little more to the fun of PVP (Release more PVP servers for US please). It contains a LOT of content that I actually enjoy (though it takes some adjusting to really enjoy the game), but most of all it's F2P AND F2D. They're receiving a decent build from the US MMO community, and their content isn't bad. I believe that paying for a game and it's expansions is a big investment as is. And to say that CO's not going to have any competition because of it? Huh? Whatchu talkin' bout Willis?! THE Rooster Nash |
|
Originally posted by Question82
Oh yeah, BOO on instancing personal content!!! It lacks immersion to instance any fighting that would go on! I can see why they'd HAVE to, and maybe that's why a certain group backed out of THEIR project (ahem Marvel). But still, it failed for DDO (among other reasons). While I loved COH/COV (kinda), and I love the super-hero genre, neither of these games are truly exciting to me. "Well, what is?!" you ask... SW:TOR and The Secret World!!! Gangsta... THE Rooster Nash |
|
|
indiramourn
 Hard Core Member
Joined: 12/13/05
MMOs require more reasoning and imagination than most stereotypically ''adult'' activities. |
Originally posted by DeserttFoxx
Guild wars seemed to work just fine... what the hell are you talking about?
I suppose the next question should be: How successful, financially, is GW compared to comparable P2P games? Probably a question we can never get the answer to. |
Originally posted by indiramourn
I suppose the next question should be: How successful, financially, is GW compared to comparable P2P games? Probably a question we can never get the answer to.
Don't bother with the F2P kiddies. Remember that they'll play just about ANY MMO, as long as it has the word FREE in it. Must stink for them, cuze I guess the reason they like the F2P model, is that they can't get mommy and daddy to pay for their monthly subscription.
|
|
