Originally posted by Lasterba
@Okhamsrazor

The main difference here is that Vanguard is actually worthy of $15/month. Hell, it's worth $20/month.

I see COUNTLESS people that say "If Vanguard had a bigger population I would go back". Well, if they all actually went back the game would need 20 servers.

I hope VG stays a subbed game. And if they gave it the development attention it deserves I would be willing to pay even more.

Big problem is, everyone is waiting for everyone to go back. Someone has to be first, and even still I doubt the actual number is as high as you think. In this situation F2P is likely the only option to breath new life into a game.

Its not always about "is a game worth a sub" thats a silly thing to say. It is a matter of how well the game is doing, its hard to promote an old struggling MMO with a sub. But F2P brings a whole new market and gives more press.

Originally posted by GMan3

    Being a long time fan of City of Heroes, I was moderately interested in seeing another Developers take on the "Super Hero Genre" until I saw SOE was the developer.  Only looked at it two more times after that and wasn't interested either time.  Last thing that killed my interest though was when a friend told me he max'd out in less than a month of casual playing.

    Thanks SOE for another botched game.

Before the Incarnate system in City of Heroes (ie for the past 6 or 7 years) it was possible to get to 50 in a day or two without power leveling then a few days to a week of farming depending how lucky you were would get you enough expensive drops to max yourself out in IOs. DCUO doesn't really hold a candle to CoH but the maxing a character out speed isn't something that should be held against it when comparing the two IMO.

Originally posted by DerWotan

Originally posted by Grotar89

Originally posted by DerWotan

Originally posted by Darkholme

Well Freemium is the wave of the future with regard to the payment model for MMOGs. Basically tiered like they are doing with DCUO with a cash shop. Done right it works very well. As long as there are enough a la carte options and no pay to win...

I will definitely be playing when it goes F2P and hell I will probably drop some cash in the cash shop. It's not a bad game and the combat is hella fun.

 

um how about no? double utilizing called "freeminimum" is the worst of both worlds shown in p2w games such as DDO. Lotro and Aoc.

Not sure you played them these games are not P2W. Lotro actually has best F2P model around it lets you unlock all game for free if u wonna grind. AoC ist even F2P it is just extended trial.

And btw I bought Lotro 1 year ago vanila + MoM + Mirkwood, and i m playing end game raids and dungeons ( plus have 1500 TP) without spending a cent since then.

 

Selling xp potions, scrolls, gear = p2w, period.

I don't know what TP is or are but sounds like something outside the game.

 

What cosmetic gear and crapy gear that is worse than lvl 80 blues that u can buy for 1 silver in AH? That is not P2W.

TP - Turbine points for them u buy store stuff and if u grind em enough u can even buy new expansion with them without spending real money.

Originally posted by Fendel84M

Originally posted by Sulaa

Well empty bad game go F2P , so at beggining it will get flooded with new people , then they will start slowly leave. 

Hmm this will allow to get some extra bucks of the title for producer before it die finally. Nothing unexcpected and exciting.

Notthing to see here imho. Move along.

{mod edit}

then stick to them and leave our p2p games alone. Seriously most of the game have gone p2w cause of crap quality, especially Lotro. Doing better than ever? Yeah cause companies are claiming so without backing it up cheap PR move and people are buying into it, lmao.

Grotar it doens't matter selling such stuff for RMT is just wrong and also the reason why I'm staying away from these games. So TP is an immersion killer?

Originally posted by Kabaal

Originally posted by GMan3

    Being a long time fan of City of Heroes, I was moderately interested in seeing another Developers take on the "Super Hero Genre" until I saw SOE was the developer.  Only looked at it two more times after that and wasn't interested either time.  Last thing that killed my interest though was when a friend told me he max'd out in less than a month of casual playing.

    Thanks SOE for another botched game.

Before the Incarnate system in City of Heroes (ie for the past 6 or 7 years) it was possible to get to 50 in a day or two without power leveling then a few days to a week of farming depending how lucky you were would get you enough expensive drops to max yourself out in IOs. DCUO doesn't really hold a candle to CoH but the maxing a character out speed isn't something that should be held against it when comparing the two IMO.

    I'm sorry, I should have clarified, he got to max due to the lack of content and things to side track you, such as exploring.  His idea of Casula play was two hours or less a day too.  As for getting to 50 in CoH in a day, only if you are playing on MAX sized teams (8 players) all the time and "sidekicked" to level 49 playing level 50 content.  Most people would define that as Power Leveling.

    I think the real problem with DCUO though was not the game itself or even the concept.  It was that yet again SOE put out a game that was not ready.  Little content and lots of bugs will kill a game every time.  For some reason they have not learned that lesson yet.

I can't believe that i bought this piece of crap.

---

Originally posted by DerWotan

---

Originally posted by Fendel84M

---

Originally posted by Sulaa

Well empty bad game go F2P , so at beggining it will get flooded with new people , then they will start slowly leave. 
Hmm this will allow to get some extra bucks of the title for producer before it die finally. Nothing unexcpected and exciting.
Notthing to see here imho. Move along.

---

{mod edit}

---

 
then stick to them and leave our p2p games alone. Seriously most of the game have gone p2w cause of crap quality, especially Lotro. Doing better than ever? Yeah cause companies are claiming so without backing it up cheap PR move and people are buying into it, lmao.
Grotar it doens't matter selling such stuff for RMT is just wrong and also the reason why I'm staying away from these games. So TP is an immersion killer?

---

They aren't lying about it; they are announcing this type of information at their investor meetings and such. More specifically, what they are saying is that they are making more money than they were prior to being F2P games. They aren't necessarily saying they are making more money than they ever have. DDO might actually be making more money than ever though.

RMT is amoral - there is no morality associated with it. It's just a different way to charge players for the experience to play the game. Even cash shops that include items that are specifically there to give players an advantage in PvP are not 'evil'. The players (customers) choose to play the games and pay for what they want.

There are dumb cash shops though. Allods Fear of Death mechanic combined with selling their anti-Fear of Death perfume in their cash shop is one example. They lost a LOT of players with that move.

DCUO will probably do really well by lowering the barrier to entry. A lot of people probably would enjoy playing the game...just not at the price SOE wanted to charge for it.

This is very welcome news. I've been wanting to try DCUO for some time now, but didnt really want to add another monthly sub to the games I already play. Now I wont have to   :D

I keep seeing people talk about how F2P is the growing business model and how its natural for many games to adopt this model.  This is absolute nonsense!  When a sub game goes F2P its due to a lack of subscriptions as a result of a lack of content or poor game design.  The reason we have had so many games go F2P is because of the terrible quality of the games released recently.  If a dev team could come up with a decent game, people would pay, like Rift.  You wont see Rift going F2P anytime in the next year or two. 

Its not the F2P model that is gaining popularity, it is the poor quality of games being released that is causing the F2P movement.

how does this game compare to city of heroes?

assuming that I don't care a single bit for DC comics and super hero stuff. because the impression I got from early previews was that this game was built for DC nerds to live out their superhero fantasies by being supermans best friend. it reeked of that horrifyingly bad SWG NGE tutorial, where you're giving han solo high fives and shooting down darth vader

I think part of the popularity of f2p and variations of it, is that most people like to play more than one mmorpg these days.  A few years ago there wasn't a ton of options in the genre but now there are perhaps too many.  Most people I know, myself included, either sub to more than one game, or at least cycle regularly through 2 or more games.  

With a new emphasis on dedicating time to multiple games, the value that each offers is relatively less (subjectively).  So any move towards lowering the cost of individual games makes it a bit easier for players to justify having that game in their stable.

Additionally I think that the cost of running a game and thus demanding a sub, is coming under more scrutiny.  A decade ago when 100k subs was a big deal, it made sense that the company needed to charge a sub to help cover the costs that weren't payed for by box sales, and to provide gm services/maintain servers.

However since a decade ago-

1- Hardware costs have been reduced

2- GM services seem to have declined in quality

3- Most titles are able to sale far more boxes these days and thus cover more of their initial costs

    a) Companies have the ability to distribute digitally and keep a larger share of the "box" price

    b) Most companies offer additional items/services for money covering more of their costs

4- Everyone wants to chase WoW; investment money is a bit easier to get ahold of now than it was a decade ago

5- "Talent" is easier to get; greater supply pushes prices down.  There has been a huge rise in gaming colleges and college applications

So between lower costs and people wanting to take advantage of the glut of options in the genre now, companies have to put up a much stronger case for that $15/month.

Game failed so naturally it would go free to play.

Originally posted by Talonsin

 

its not the F2P model that is gaining popularity, it is the poor quality of games being released that is causing the F2P movement.

Well thats patently obvious.

Originally posted by Talonsin

I keep seeing people talk about how F2P is the growing business model and how its natural for many games to adopt this model.  This is absolute nonsense!  When a sub game goes F2P its due to a lack of subscriptions as a result of a lack of content or poor game design.  The reason we have had so many games go F2P is because of the terrible quality of the games released recently.  If a dev team could come up with a decent game, people would pay, like Rift.  You wont see Rift going F2P anytime in the next year or two. 

Its not the F2P model that is gaining popularity, it is the poor quality of games being released that is causing the F2P movement.

Yeah (even though I ain't 100% sure about Rift, GW2 and TOR might hit it badly), the quality of the game matters but I still wonder how a crappy game can go from losing money to earning it by going F2P?

I swear this game was pretty much built for this, with the simplicity of the boosts, clothes, and loot.  I bet the transition will occur surprisingly quick. 

Back during beta my end criticism of the game was why the heck should we pay a sub for this?  My entire criticism of the game was that it did not offer enough to warrant a subscription model.  Price of the box?  Absolutely, the developers made a solid multiplayer game, just not a solid mmo.

F2P is right for this game.  It doesn't have, even close, to the depth of gameplay and story to be a Sub game nor do I think it was any better than a typical arcade game.

Originally posted by DerWotan

Wish people would stop assuming Warhammer will go p2w its a pvp centric game so it wouldn't work, period.

Anyway from what I've read DCUO should have been b2p (like Guild Wars) from the get go still can't believe Marvel let Soe ruin such a famous IP. Pull the plug and take back your license before Soe can do further damage with their model

Sorry to be the comic book geek on this but Marvel dont own DC, DC comics owns DC. sorry but had to say it. Marvel are owned by disney last i heared.

I did buy this game on day of release and really enjoyed it especially since the look was based on one of me favorite artist's Jim Lee, it was my first game that i p2p. I was still playing up untill they said they wanted an extra pounds for the green lantern dlc, now i  love the lanterns universe but i aint paying a subscription to a game to then have to fork out extra for the content i waited for. 

I will probably jump back into this game now it is f2p and the fact the lantern dlc is now free, but iam not sure if that is for every one. I would like to know who is the buisness manager on this as they dont seam to grasp what ppl want. 

Now Marvel have said they are doing a proper mmo (since they are doing the hero squad bull) but you dont create you'r own charicters like dcuo you will play as one of there established charicters. Now I am sorry but i thought the whole point of these games was that every one had there own style and look. Why would i want to play as one of youre charicters when i could go buy one of there normall game, just dont make sense to me.

Saw it coming since it first released.