Originally posted by TheHatter

Originally posted by zaxxon23

 

Since we're usually on the same page in regards to our thoughts on games, I'm gonna go easy on you.  :)  The fact of the matter is that every game I've *really* played has been 1)  successful and 2) rmt infested.  In my book, the lack of rmt usually points to a poor game.  The numbers simply don't lie.  You guys against rmt are an extreme minority.  When you quit mmos because of rmt you are but the slightest drop in the bucket.  All the other people who either participate in rmt or don't really give a darn will still be there paying the bills.  Sorry.

 

Ummm.... in the West, RMT games fail pretty hard. They are usually only successful with kids who just want the F2P aspect of most RMT games.

 

Except in EVE's case. EVE's system is pure RMT, but it's done in a way that really works with the way the game is designed.

This is incorrect.
 

Games with item shops are incredibly successful in the west. There is a good reason why they continue to pop up far more frequently than p2p games.

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by TheHatter

Originally posted by zaxxon23

 

Since we're usually on the same page in regards to our thoughts on games, I'm gonna go easy on you.  :)  The fact of the matter is that every game I've *really* played has been 1)  successful and 2) rmt infested.  In my book, the lack of rmt usually points to a poor game.  The numbers simply don't lie.  You guys against rmt are an extreme minority.  When you quit mmos because of rmt you are but the slightest drop in the bucket.  All the other people who either participate in rmt or don't really give a darn will still be there paying the bills.  Sorry.

 

Ummm.... in the West, RMT games fail pretty hard. They are usually only successful with kids who just want the F2P aspect of most RMT games.

 

Except in EVE's case. EVE's system is pure RMT, but it's done in a way that really works with the way the game is designed.

This is incorrect.
 

Games with item shops are incredibly successful in the west. There is a good reason why they continue to pop up far more frequently than p2p games.

There is another reason as well, how many of them are actually unique games? Just about every other f2p that pops up seems to be the same game that poped up last month, with a different name. Half the time they do not even do as much as change some textures here and there.

Originally posted by SaintViktor

Originally posted by Geriden

 I gotta agree at this stage the mmo genre has turned sour complete lack of regulation in standards is to blame in my opinion. Releasing half ass unfinished buggy game's , Terrible customer service (looking at you funcom / Ncsoft) Now this monthly fee + RMT its a total farce i stopped playing mmo's all together now it's a waste of money the companies have gotten so greedy and dishonest and seem to think they have the right to rip us off sick of it and im done it i hope the genre die's because it deserve's to. 

 

Agreed. No regulation means they can do whatever they want and get away with it if people buy into the idea. People need to remember that as customers they have the final say. If they do not want the sub+rmt then boycott it. DO NOT buy their games and canel their subscriptions to send a message across to developers. We are not walking ATM machines to feed devlopers pockets 24/7.

LOL .. boycott them just because they want to sell you $10 pets? Get real. I bought TWO.

Originally posted by Malickie

Originally posted by Gameloading

Originally posted by TheHatter

Originally posted by zaxxon23

 

Since we're usually on the same page in regards to our thoughts on games, I'm gonna go easy on you.  :)  The fact of the matter is that every game I've *really* played has been 1)  successful and 2) rmt infested.  In my book, the lack of rmt usually points to a poor game.  The numbers simply don't lie.  You guys against rmt are an extreme minority.  When you quit mmos because of rmt you are but the slightest drop in the bucket.  All the other people who either participate in rmt or don't really give a darn will still be there paying the bills.  Sorry.

 

Ummm.... in the West, RMT games fail pretty hard. They are usually only successful with kids who just want the F2P aspect of most RMT games.

 

Except in EVE's case. EVE's system is pure RMT, but it's done in a way that really works with the way the game is designed.

This is incorrect.
 

Games with item shops are incredibly successful in the west. There is a good reason why they continue to pop up far more frequently than p2p games.

There is another reason as well, how many of them are actually unique games? Just about every other f2p that pops up seems to be the same game that poped up last month, with a different name. Half the time they do not even do as much as change some textures here and there.

Sometimes a game switches hosts and undergoes a namechange,There are a few games that treat a big expansion as a sequel, but to say that there is a significant amount of companies releasing the exact same game isn't true.
 

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

I'm going to make a restaurant analogy here.

Dining out at a restaurant for a meal is your traditional single-player game. You order a meal, you (hopefully) know what you're getting, and it's served. Meals generally have 40 hours worth of eating. Now some guys can burn through that in 10 hours, and other guys stretch it to 80 hours. Sometimes you dine with a friend or two. Sometimes you buy a meal that's totally not what you thought it was (MoO3), you eat it for a few minutes and start throwing up. Then you move on. If you find a restaurant you like, such as Black Isle, you order a lot of meals there. But this isn't stopping you from going out to Bullfrog every now and then.

In the mid-1990s a new type of dining experience was invented with pioneers like Merdian Express, Ultima Bistro, and McQuesties. Truly massive eating experiences (MEEs). You sit down with thousands of other diners and can eat however much you want. Instead of going out to eat with friends, you go out to eat alone and come back having made hundreds of friends. The catch is you are paying $15 a month for this perpetual ongoing buffet. Because you are paying $15 a month, you end up doing all your eating there.

Fast forward 12 years. After BurgerCraft gets up to 10 million paying regulars, it seems every announced dining establishment is either an MEE or has elements of one.

So now the diner is left with a dilemma. He enjoys getting his meals at a MEE. Back when there were a small handful of choices, he didn't mind picking the one with the cuisine he liked and eating there. But now there are hundreds and hundreds of establishments offering massive eating. He can't pay $15 for all of them, so he sticks with the one he is most familiar with (BurgerCraft). And this is why BurgerCraft dominates the massive eating market - everyone eats there because everybody else eats there, and the point of MEEs is to eat with others.

If only there was some way the customer could eat at multiple restaurants. Instead of paying a $15 a month food subscription to every single place he wants try out, what if he only had to pay for the food he wanted to eat when he was hungry? Then he could choose a different MEE to eat at each day, and not be shelling out the subscription for all of them?

Because you see, if he is already subscribed to one MEE any additional MEEs he frequents is essentially wasting his money. He's already paid to eat every meal at BurgerCraft. Why then should he also pay to eat every meal somewhere else, just in case one day he decides he's not in the mood for a burger?

The solution is quite revolutionary. It's called a-la carte.

Getting all your meals a la carte is certainly much more expensive than $15 a month. A lot more. We're talking stapples here, your everyday fare. Sure, BurgerCraft patties are made out of ground pig snout and chicken beaks (not to mention the 100% recycled plastics cheese) but as ive pointed out before MMOs have yet to evolve to cuisine status.
 

You can dine a la carte on fried foods and calorie bomb desserts all you want. Ill stick to tea and a small salad in the meantime.

Originally posted by Caleveira

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

I'm going to make a restaurant analogy here.

Dining out at a restaurant for a meal is your traditional single-player game. You order a meal, you (hopefully) know what you're getting, and it's served. Meals generally have 40 hours worth of eating. Now some guys can burn through that in 10 hours, and other guys stretch it to 80 hours. Sometimes you dine with a friend or two. Sometimes you buy a meal that's totally not what you thought it was (MoO3), you eat it for a few minutes and start throwing up. Then you move on. If you find a restaurant you like, such as Black Isle, you order a lot of meals there. But this isn't stopping you from going out to Bullfrog every now and then.

In the mid-1990s a new type of dining experience was invented with pioneers like Merdian Express, Ultima Bistro, and McQuesties. Truly massive eating experiences (MEEs). You sit down with thousands of other diners and can eat however much you want. Instead of going out to eat with friends, you go out to eat alone and come back having made hundreds of friends. The catch is you are paying $15 a month for this perpetual ongoing buffet. Because you are paying $15 a month, you end up doing all your eating there.

Fast forward 12 years. After BurgerCraft gets up to 10 million paying regulars, it seems every announced dining establishment is either an MEE or has elements of one.

So now the diner is left with a dilemma. He enjoys getting his meals at a MEE. Back when there were a small handful of choices, he didn't mind picking the one with the cuisine he liked and eating there. But now there are hundreds and hundreds of establishments offering massive eating. He can't pay $15 for all of them, so he sticks with the one he is most familiar with (BurgerCraft). And this is why BurgerCraft dominates the massive eating market - everyone eats there because everybody else eats there, and the point of MEEs is to eat with others.

If only there was some way the customer could eat at multiple restaurants. Instead of paying a $15 a month food subscription to every single place he wants try out, what if he only had to pay for the food he wanted to eat when he was hungry? Then he could choose a different MEE to eat at each day, and not be shelling out the subscription for all of them?

Because you see, if he is already subscribed to one MEE any additional MEEs he frequents is essentially wasting his money. He's already paid to eat every meal at BurgerCraft. Why then should he also pay to eat every meal somewhere else, just in case one day he decides he's not in the mood for a burger?

The solution is quite revolutionary. It's called a-la carte.

Getting all your meals a la carte is certainly much more expensive than $15 a month. A lot more. We're talking stapples here, your everyday fare. Sure, BurgerCraft patties are made out of ground pig snout and chicken beaks (not to mention the 100% recycled plastics cheese) but as ive pointed out before MMOs have yet to evolve to cuisine status.
 

You can dine a la carte on fried foods and calorie bomb desserts all you want. Ill stick to tea and a small salad in the meantime.

I have a feeling you completely missed what I was getting at.

RMT is good for the consumer. As an MMO player, there are only so many MMOs one can play at a time. This is both due to the nature of the genre (where the major competition is at endgame) and due to the ongoing subscription cost which is on top of buying the box. However, when you pay a subscription fee you are paying for unlimited time. This means if you have multiple subscriptions you are effectively wasting your money on some of them, since that time is already "paid for" in another game. It also makes it very hard to try-out new MMOs as they are released, because of the significant investment required to actually determine whether or not it's for you. For example, I played Champion Online for about 2 months until I got my main character to level 34 and realized the endgame was lacking. This cost me the price of the box, plus a month that I paid for (I got a free month out of steam). Therefor when I try out a new MMO, I pre-filter my options. I am not going to try out Fallen Earth as much as I'm tempted, because I doubt it's a particularly good game. The investment is not worth the chance I won't like it. Single player games don't have the same risk, because you can choose to come back and play in 3 months and it will still be there (without renewing a subscription, and without being a total noob since you aren't competing with anyone). Single player games are a known cost. And also predicting player behavior in a virtual world is notoriously difficult, making it much harder to design an MMO than a single player RPG. So there is a much higher rate of terrible MMOs that make it to launch, because certain flaws simply won't be apparent until after the game has matured.

To take Oblivion as an example, it had some very fundamental flaws in the combat system. I basically ended up having to deliberately gimp myself to make it challenging, otherwise I could run around completely invisible and 1-shot anything. Note that in a single player world it's valid to do this (make your own hard mode), but in an MMO everybody would have to run around invisible and 1-shot everything... because everybody else is doing it. Again, MMOs are simply more difficult to design meaning a lower percentage will get it right.

So there are hundreds of subscription based MMOs out there I will never try, as purely a function of investment v. probability of enjoyment. I am not alone. And MMO companies know this, which is why you see a clone effect in the market and a reluctance to try out new ideas. As a consumer I'm not going to subsidize 10 terrible MMOs just to find the gem. This is why a f2p/RMT model is good. I'm a lot more likely to try a free MMO, knowing that I may play it for 5 minutes and determine it's not for me. Or play it for a month and move on. I might even drop a few dollars in an item shop for an MMO that I know I'll only play for a month or two. But I'm not going to buy a box and pay a subscription if I think I won't be around 6 months later.

Thus f2p/RMT allows MMO companies to take more risks, which means trying new things. Because more players will to risk their time and money to try out different things, in order to find that gem. That we even have a concept of the "Wow clone" is an artifact of the western market being more favorable to subscription models in MMOs. Most players aren't going to drop the big bucks up front on an MMO just to try it out. In subscription-land, they are going to wait until they see a familiar MMO style they know will work, or until there is a critical mass of players already in a game.

I geuss it's a good thing the user deleted him or her self.

I mean do we really need people on gaming sites that want 10/20 millions gamers to lose their game?

Nah of course nobody wants this genre to really die, I mean obvious people who arn't really gamers might think that way, but a true gamer understands that he or she does not have to like each and every game that is developed, doesn't mean the genre should die.

I dislike RMT but still see no reason to wish this genre to die, should we really ignore all those thousands if not millions of players that do in fact enjoy games games that have RMT. Of course not, that would be a very selfish act, and this aint the genre to be selfish in. I also believe that those who want games to die are the type of "I want it all and want it all crowed"

I do wish however that we get even more options in this genre, so that most gamers can find their game to enjoy.

@ Nipashnaka; Nah, i pretty much saw what you were getting at and responded from my own point of view. I don't play 2 MMOs at the same time and i will stick to the one i'm playing for the long haul. Different people, different playing styles. To me RMT is not convenient since it makes becoming a veteran in a game worthless. You on the other hand argue for f2ps fitting your style (btw, there is such a thing as trials) as you will be regularly trying out games.

Originally posted by Caleveira

@ Nipashnaka; Nah, i pretty much saw what you were getting at and responded from my own point of view. I don't play 2 MMOs at the same time and i will stick to the one i'm playing for the long haul. Different people, different playing styles. To me RMT is not convenient since it makes becoming a veteran in a game worthless. You on the other hand argue for f2ps fitting your style (btw, there is such a thing as trials) as you will be regularly trying out games.

If you stick with the one you are playing for the long haul, how do you determine which one that is before you buy the box? Especially if it's a new MMO, where all the research in the world won't tell you whether they screwed up the endgame until you get there.

As a side note, the problem with trials is I can't think of a subscription MMO that offers a trial at launch. MMOs use box sales to recoup development costs while the subscription revenue supports the live team. So basically companies paint themselves in a corner where they need those box sales, in some cases, by any means necessary. Which makes it even harder for the player, who now has to wade through marketing nonsense before making the determination.

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

If you stick with the one you are playing for the long haul, how do you determine which one that is before you buy the box? Especially if it's a new MMO, where all the research in the world won't tell you whether they screwed up the endgame until you get there.

As a side note, the problem with trials is I can't think of a subscription MMO that offers a trial at launch. MMOs use box sales to recoup development costs while the subscription revenue supports the live team. So basically companies paint themselves in a corner where they need those box sales, in some bases, by any means necessary. Which makes it even harder for the player, who now has to wade through marketing nonsense before making the determination.

 

I'll let you in on a little secret. Don't jump the gun and join an MMO at release. You should know by now that no release goes...smoothly. There's bugs. There's server ques. There's tons of things that go wrong. Why subject yourself to that?

Wait 3 months for the Free Trial. You'll be able to try it risk free. And usually alot of things will be fixed and patched by then. Also, by waiting a good amount of time, you can gather information on how the game is liked (or not liked) overall. And in that case, you can save yourself the trouble of even bothering with the 14-day Trial all together.

Patience clearly is a virtue. And...if you can't simply wait 2-3 months after a game's release, well then, yes...you are at risk of making a foolish decision and losing your hard earned cash.

Originally posted by Cadexn

Originally posted by Scalebane

 Go enjoy single player games, the world of MMO's will continue no matter what.

 

Dragon Age: Origins, The warden DLC = 560 UBICASH (or whatever it is called)

 

Single player games will soon going to be RMT too!

 Console games already ARE *gasp* thanks to microsoft and their xsux360. Almost every new game feels unfinished, and never seems complete until purchasing what is missing through the DLC..

  Fable2 was a prime example, that game was so incomplete out of the box.. it was the last game I bought because of the exploitation of downloadable content.

((Edit: sorry that was off-topic :P))

 No MMO genre does not deserve to die.. especially not for the over-exaderated and premature opinions about what WoW is "doing". 

 These games may only hold my interest for a month tops, but that is still 1 month of cheap/free entertainment I wouldn't have otherwise.

Calveira and Disownation aren't doing a very good job reading Nipashnaka's posts.  :(

Doesn't help that Calveira automatically assumes the very existance of RMT automatically makes being a veteran worthless.  Which is a little odd, since this thread was started by WOW's RMT, which clearly doesn't make being a veteran worthless.  So obviously there are some ways to do RMT which don't ruin things.

Originally posted by disownation

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

If you stick with the one you are playing for the long haul, how do you determine which one that is before you buy the box? Especially if it's a new MMO, where all the research in the world won't tell you whether they screwed up the endgame until you get there.

As a side note, the problem with trials is I can't think of a subscription MMO that offers a trial at launch. MMOs use box sales to recoup development costs while the subscription revenue supports the live team. So basically companies paint themselves in a corner where they need those box sales, in some bases, by any means necessary. Which makes it even harder for the player, who now has to wade through marketing nonsense before making the determination.

 

 

I'll let you in on a little secret. Don't jump the gun and join an MMO at release. You should know by now that no release goes...smoothly. There's bugs. There's server ques. There's tons of things that go wrong. Why subject yourself to that?

If everybody followed this maxim, no MMO would exist on day 2 after release. So clearly it cannot be a generic solution to the problem.

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

Originally posted by disownation

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

If you stick with the one you are playing for the long haul, how do you determine which one that is before you buy the box? Especially if it's a new MMO, where all the research in the world won't tell you whether they screwed up the endgame until you get there.

As a side note, the problem with trials is I can't think of a subscription MMO that offers a trial at launch. MMOs use box sales to recoup development costs while the subscription revenue supports the live team. So basically companies paint themselves in a corner where they need those box sales, in some bases, by any means necessary. Which makes it even harder for the player, who now has to wade through marketing nonsense before making the determination.

 

 

I'll let you in on a little secret. Don't jump the gun and join an MMO at release. You should know by now that no release goes...smoothly. There's bugs. There's server ques. There's tons of things that go wrong. Why subject yourself to that?

If everybody followed this maxim, no MMO would exist on day 2 after release. So clearly it cannot be a generic solution to the problem.

 

In my opinion, most MMOs shouldnt exist in the shape they do at day 2 after release, being incomplete and severely buggy.

But they do, and many more MMOs will follow this pattern, because there's a massive amount of people that think its completely okey to pay for something incomplete and buggy. Thats pretty much how it is, and I cant see that changing for the better any time soon.

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

Originally posted by disownation

I'll let you in on a little secret. Don't jump the gun and join an MMO at release. You should know by now that no release goes...smoothly. There's bugs. There's server ques. There's tons of things that go wrong. Why subject yourself to that?

If everybody followed this maxim, no MMO would exist on day 2 after release. So clearly it cannot be a generic solution to the problem.

 

The comments are aimed at people who cannot handle the shoddy state of some games at release. A lot of people are more forgiving than others, some expect console quality releases and cry and shout when they don't have that. Which is fair enough and these are the people who should stay away from new mmo games for a few months.

In an ideal world it would be nice to have polished complete bug free MMOs(as it would be nice to have new bug free Operating Systems as well, i used this comparsion as both are massive software projects) but we have seen time and time again that, even with the best intentions MMO producers struggle to release games in decent form.

An exception to this is Bilizzard which have immensely deep pockets. I can assure you devs take pride in their work(as do builders of any thing) and no dev would like their work to be released unfinished and buggy. Which make it look like financial issues.

There are two type of MMO players, those that can over look the bugs and enjoy the game knowing that the bugs will be fixed and does that cant. Both are legitimate players with different demands.

Look at the two recnetly MMO releases, FE and Aion, there are some players that hate Aion even though it was released polished and fairly bug free, simply due to the design and nature of the game, then look at FE which released a bit jerky and clunky not as polished as Aion and some players absolutly love it, dispite its lack of polish.
 

Since it is unlikely that MMO releases will improve soon that advice given above is the best to avoid dissapointment.

Way back when, before the internet was a huge thing, games included this helpful phone number. For only $2.99 a minute, you can get all of the tips you need to master your (single player) game. I presume this might even include cheat codes! Just fork over a little money and all of your frustration will be gone.

In other words, RMT is an old business, even for single player games.

Seriously? Are you really complaining about and OPTIONAL item that you can purchase IF YOU WANT TO?

I don't understand why people have a problem with optional stuff like this. It's not affecting gameplay in any way what-so-ever. I don't care about race changes...I don't care about server transfers...I don't care about fluff pets that you can buy.

The only thing that would really piss me off is if they start selling items like XP potions or armor and weapons. If I were you, I'd be pointing out the faction changes rather than the stupid fluff pets.

RMT isn't always bad. The sky is not falling. The MMO genre doesn't deserve to die.

I wouldn't sweat the future of MMORPG's too hard. The answers to this one is simple.

Problem - A Game company gets greedy with RMT's and is willfully releasing less content with a game's release and progression than games in the past have done. Players are seeing a trend of paying more to get less.

Answer - Players shift away from the game to one that doesn't use this route. Players may even vocally call a company out for this form of business practice, and then pledge to boycott their products as a personal choice. And then stick to it.

Problem - A Game company develops a new cool game that has a really half-assed list of finished features for launch, stringing players along with a lot of talk and promises but ultimately failing to deliver.

Answer - Too many players have gotten burned by this via Age of Conan, Warhammer Online, Horizons, Darkfall... I'll just keep it at a few for examples. Many players are now simply allowing games to be released and weather *other* players paying for them and playing them for the first 2 to 3 months, to see what the reviews have to say before they invest. This is a wise move by the players, but a crippling move to the game company who is DEPENDING on the largest chunk of launch profits from their game sales.

Nipashnaka - "If everybody followed this maxim, no MMO would exist on day 2 after release. So clearly it cannot be a generic solution to the problem. "

This is certainly true, but MMORPG's offer free betas and especially 2 to 3 week Open Beta events where all potential players and buyers are given a limited span of time to "trest drive the game" in its very near to finished state before a launch. If a player is serious enough about a game to plunk down the 50-60 bucks for it because of hype, a game company shouldn't be afraid of showing its product off to them ahead of time. World of Warcraft DID get my money at launch because I DID make a Tauren and try the game out during the open beta. I saw it was good and well made. City of Heroes got my money because of the quality of the game I could see for myself during the Open Beta. Age of Conan and Warhammer Online didn't get my money, as I saw both games weren't up for delivering what they promised.

I've gotten to where I follow the above line of thought involving MMORPG's these days. I know I'm not alone in doing so as well. As more and more players see the light, the companies will have to change or at the very least, new companies will do so with their new products to lure in the ones who are staying clear of the big titles.

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

Originally posted by disownation

Originally posted by Nipashnaka

If you stick with the one you are playing for the long haul, how do you determine which one that is before you buy the box? Especially if it's a new MMO, where all the research in the world won't tell you whether they screwed up the endgame until you get there.

As a side note, the problem with trials is I can't think of a subscription MMO that offers a trial at launch. MMOs use box sales to recoup development costs while the subscription revenue supports the live team. So basically companies paint themselves in a corner where they need those box sales, in some bases, by any means necessary. Which makes it even harder for the player, who now has to wade through marketing nonsense before making the determination.

 

 

I'll let you in on a little secret. Don't jump the gun and join an MMO at release. You should know by now that no release goes...smoothly. There's bugs. There's server ques. There's tons of things that go wrong. Why subject yourself to that?

If everybody followed this maxim, no MMO would exist on day 2 after release. So clearly it cannot be a generic solution to the problem.

 

Right on.  Personally, I like to be in a mmo from day one.  I can deal with the bugs and the queues because six months down the road when everyone else decides to join, I'll be way ahead of them.  When I'm the one joining late, I'm not too big a fan of playing catchup.  I'm just a minority in those two situations, as most people don't wanna deal with the bugs, and most people don't really mind playing catchup.  That is unless we're talking about a wow clone, in which case if you fall behind the crowd you really don't experience the best part of the game, which is leveling up with lots of other people.  That's why those games make lots of new servers and also have lots of older dead servers.  It's a flaw/positive of those kind of mmos, depending on your point of view.

Originally posted by VowOfSilence

Anyone know any good flash game sites?

 

guess what, flash games are going RMT.
get over it.

Even Pogo.com gaming site, where you can buy a membership by the month or annually, has "badge albums" and clothing and decorations for your "mini" (avatar) that cost GEMS, which cost real world money.

So yes....even flash and java based games are going RMT.