I found this (source) quite interesting. Does anyone know how League of Legends system works?

"In an interview with Chinese site 17173.com, SOE's John Smedley shared some revealing details about PlanetSide 2, including the fact that the upcoming MMO shooter will be free.

MMOsite carried the English version of the story early this morning, but there were a few points that were lost in translation. So we contacted Smedley for clarification, and he said that while he had previously mentioned that the game will be "some form of free-to-play," SOE is not prepared to announce specifics just yet, but we should "expect something that will be very player friendly." He mentioned that a Blizzard-style auction house won't be a part of that plan but that he was fond of what League of Legends had done with its system."

Thank goodness subs killed ps1.

Smedley if you ever read this: brilliant idea.  League of Legends obviously is doing it right.  Make all of the features of PS2 free to play, but have skins and other such things cost credits which can be earned in-game or purchased through the game.  I'd suggest make classes/vehicles/guns unlockable but also where a select 8 or so become free for a week.

Riot has the best system right now and it's why they're currently one of the most profitable games online.  Offer high value and people will give you more money.  Offer low value (ie stupid cash shops where you have to buy everything to be competitive) and the game dies.

This.

As a League of Legends fan, I was blown away by how they handled their cash shops and game. I have paid Zero (0) bucks on the game, but have gotten a hell of a block of entertainment hours from their game. They know that there are players like me who are paying them nothing, and yet they reward me for being a good player with points to spend on everything available in the game that has a function. Nothing is witheld.

By the same token, they can and will ban and shut down accounts of free people who are abusive and are reported with proof. Been there, seen that. They want money, which means they want a huge player base, which means they can weed out troublemakers and brag about enforcing the rules to encourage more paying players.

Sony being Sony however will probably remain narrow minded and gimp free players a bit too drastically at first. I'll be watching closely on this one.

Depends entirely on what they're able to produce content-wise to buy for money. League of Legends is making money hand-over-fist selling new characters to the impatient and skins to the vain, but they have literally infinite room to grow and sell. PS2 on the other hand is an FPS, and I can't think of a way for them to just churn out new characters to play as in 2 week intervals the way Riot does. Closest I can think of is something akin to how TF2 handled free to play, which wouldn't be half bad for them.

If, however, they decide to go and sell the most powerful guns and armor for cash, the game will fail spectacularly. It will put WAR's failings to shame with how bad the game crashes and burns.

When Planetside1 did free to pay Reserve things, that was a really good thing, unfortunatley it only lasted 1 year. 

It's a really good thing for Planetside cause in MMOFPS more players always = better.

OK.... I'm gonna say something about all these LoL references......

LoL is NOT an mmo..... So why are you comparing it to it ? It's like saying, it should be like Battlefield 3, only pay for the game and no monthly fee....... !!!

Don't get me wrong, I would like the game to be F2P..... or rather B2P (B=buy), like Guild Wars 2..... With a cashshop that sell stuff that doesn't affect the game-experience at all, so that the ones who don't want to spend money don't have to, and nobody can pay to become overpowered....... I want it to be B2P, cause it's the only way they can make a cashshop like this.... Cause otherwise they wouldn't earn enough money to run the servers and stuff........... And don't bring up that LoL, "has it like this, why can't PS2 have it?", Cause it's not an MMO !!!!

yea even with boxed sales only and no cash shop, it would not be enough to support the game longterm, in needs to be F2P or P2P. running PS2 servers would be an insane cost, unless their programming is that insane...which is possible.

I have never seen sony do ftp correctly and I have no hopes here, I almost had hopes for this game thou (being a huge fan of planetside one) but alas, this F2P with transactions is going to suck. Everytime they do this, SWG prime example, the release items at first that are just "for looks", then it goes to "just buffs" then it goes "animated cool stuff" then it goes "stat enhancment" then "uber item". Sorry, SOE fails at F2P, then again they fail at MMO development, website development, forum and account security... bah not even going to waste another breath on these guys anymore. This almost (almost) made my play one SOE game again , sadly this is the nail in the coffin for me. Way to fail Smedely, then again, thats no shock now isn't it.

Now SOE never did ftp with swg, but I refer to the cards, then again you can pick any SOE game that is ftp and see the same thing mention, I am sure some will ("gulp!*) actually defend SOE , (scary thought) but alas, it should have a duel model but it won't, IE pay monthy for all or micro, then I "might" look into this, but if LoL is something he likes, get ready to see exactly what I posted above, looks..buffs,animations,stats,uber items. You read it here first ! look back 2 years later and stand in awww! ;)

Originally posted by chaintm

I have never seen sony do ftp correctly and I have no hopes here, I almost had hopes for this game thou (being a huge fan of planetside one) but alas, this F2P with transactions is going to suck. Everytime they do this, SWG prime example, the release items at first that are just "for looks", then it goes to "just buffs" then it goes "animated cool stuff" then it goes "stat enhancment" then "uber item". Sorry, SOE fails at F2P, then again they fail at MMO development, website development, forum and account security... bah not even going to waste another breath on these guys anymore. This almost (almost) made my play one SOE game again , sadly this is the nail in the coffin for me. Way to fail Smedely, then again, thats no shock now isn't it.

 

Now SOE never did ftp with swg, but I refer to the cards, then again you can pick any SOE game that is ftp and see the same thing mention, I am sure some will ("gulp!*) actually defend SOE , (scary thought) but alas, it should have a duel model but it won't, IE pay monthy for all or micro, then I "might" look into this, but if LoL is something he likes, get ready to see exactly what I posted above, looks..buffs,animations,stats,uber items. You read it here first ! look back 2 years later and stand in awww! ;)

There's really no other side to argue.  There is your viewpoint (which a vocal minority share) that somehow SOE is the worst company in the world, they can't do anything right, they are morally evil and you therefore hate them.  There there is the other side, the majority of rational people that think meh, they're just another company with good and bad points.  In other words, no one is going to "defend" SOE because there's just nothing to defend.  There's no there, there.

But whatever.  Maybe your next rant can replace the S in SOE with a $, now that would be creative and never seen before!

His point of view with a little less rant is that not enough has changed at SOE to believe that they will change their monetary policy. The same people are in charge, and they're likely to make the same decisions, leading to some amount of profits for them at the cost of widespread popularity.

Originally posted by StMichael

His point of view with a little less rant is that not enough has changed at SOE to believe that they will change their monetary policy. The same people are in charge, and they're likely to make the same decisions, leading to some amount of profits for them at the cost of widespread popularity.

And I have the same reply, that there's no argument for either side here.  To my knowledge SOE hasn't made a game designed to be f2p (outside of children's games) from the start.  The games like EQ/EQ2/DCUO which have item shops now were not f2p to start.  They, like countless other games from other developers, got their cash shops when sub numbers began to decline and/or the games themselves became outdated.

They've had mixed success with f2p/cash shops, DCUO has really taken off, EQ has stayed about flat, EQ2 hasn't done as well.  In other words they've done about average, just like every other mmo company out there outside of Blizzard.  Hell there are people on these forums angry with SOE for NOT making Vanguard and the now cancelled f2p lol.  That makes me laugh (or is it cry), there are people that hate them for making games f2p and people that hate them for not making games f2p.

Its just irrational to have these hatreds for a company, especially when its over something about which we have no specifics.  But I guess that's the purpose of the interweb, I'm probably the crazy one around here for not hating some specific game company.

I've actually never played an SOE game, so I have no personal experience with what everyone appears to hate about them. But I do know that people don't change overnight and to my knowledge neither has their management. Whether the game starts out free to play or not  has little bearing on their usual business practices. If they believe their business models in their other games are the way to go for them, what would change their perceptions of those business models for a new game?

Originally posted by StMichael

I've actually never played an SOE game, so I have no personal experience with what everyone appears to hate about them. But I do know that people don't change overnight and to my knowledge neither has their management. Whether the game starts out free to play or not  has little bearing on their usual business practices. If they believe their business models in their other games are the way to go for them, what would change their perceptions of those business models for a new game?

You've never even played one of their games?  Then why are you .. sigh.  Everyone doesn't hate them, a vocal minority says it over and over like a mantra.  Just like those that hate WoW or SWTOR or WAR or whatever game.  How does something like that become "everyone"? 

Doesn't it trigger a tiny bit of self introspection in that you haven't even played one of their games but you just know that they are bad and it compels you to take a side in this?   You don't really know how any of their f2p/cash shops operate yet you just know that they operate badly and no one likes them, no matter the fact that DCUO just picked up around 1 million players after going f2p.  Isn't it odd?  

I think my point has been proven although it really is pointless for me to make it.  People are people, reality be damned heh.  SOE is just like any other company out there except that they made the mistake of once hurting the feelings of star wars fanboys (even worse, star wars MMO fanboys) by trying and failing to fix a bad game.  I don't envy BioWare one bit lol.

That sounds like an awful lot of sugar coating for SOE. To date, I've yet to hear from anyone a single good word about NGE, and some people even go so far as to try reverse-engineering their original disks to create privately owned servers running the original game. As for their efforts on free to play specifically, I'm trusting other people to know pay to win rather than having to suffer it myself.

Edit: It's also hardly a "vocal minority" that takes issue with SOE. From wikipedias page on SWG:

Another major update called the "New Game Enhancements" (abbreviated as NGE) was implemented on 15 November 2005, and created huge demonstrations in game from the majority of players, and became available in retail on 22 November 2005 as the Star Wars Galaxies: Starter Kit.^[43] Major changes included the reduction and simplification of professions, simplification of gameplay mechanics, and Jedi becoming a starting profession. Media outlets such as CBS News, New York Times, New York Post and Wired Magazine criticized the reduced depth and complexity of the game.,^{[44][45][46][47][48]} but John Smedley, president of Sony Online Entertainment, defended the decision claiming it necessary to revamp the game in order to reverse the deterioration they were seeing in the subscriber base.^[49] SOE offered refunds on the Trials of Obi-Wan expansion due to it being released two days before the NGE was implemented.^[50] The development team affirmed this was their desired direction for the game and that they would modify parameters to address player's concerns.^[51] Features such as expertise trees were later added to the game to add complexity and differentiation to characters. After the announcement that SOE had acquired the game Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, Smedley addressed that game's players about the perceived threat of major changes to the game:

We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past and not listening to the players.

—John Smedley, president of Sony Online Entertainment^[52]

History has shown $oe (props Aluvy) gets the grade of A in development but F in business. NGE was sony's knee-jerk reaction to Lucas lighting a fire under their butt. Lucas is smart and knows when someone isn't leveraging their IP; so they pulled the plug. No more SWG.

One only has to have played SOE games over the years to see how utterly inexperienced SOE is in business; completely failing to leverage their products. EQ1 could have millions of subscribers today if SOE weren't such utter business noobs. But instead, EQ1 is surviving (perhaps 50k subs) solely on dev-talent.

Originally posted by knallpulver

OK.... I'm gonna say something about all these LoL references......

LoL is NOT an mmo..... So why are you comparing it to it ? It's like saying, it should be like Battlefield 3, only pay for the game and no monthly fee....... !!!

Don't get me wrong, I would like the game to be F2P..... or rather B2P (B=buy), like Guild Wars 2..... With a cashshop that sell stuff that doesn't affect the game-experience at all, so that the ones who don't want to spend money don't have to, and nobody can pay to become overpowered....... I want it to be B2P, cause it's the only way they can make a cashshop like this.... Cause otherwise they wouldn't earn enough money to run the servers and stuff........... And don't bring up that LoL, "has it like this, why can't PS2 have it?", Cause it's not an MMO !!!!

Your not right... If you could by cool skiins, or buy specific battleship skins..... Ppl would do it. As they do in LOL.

Originally posted by StMichael

That sounds like an awful lot of sugar coating for SOE. To date, I've yet to hear from anyone a single good word about NGE, and some people even go so far as to try reverse-engineering their original disks to create privately owned servers running the original game. As for their efforts on free to play specifically, I'm trusting other people to know pay to win rather than having to suffer it myself.

 

Edit: It's also hardly a "vocal minority" that takes issue with SOE. From wikipedias page on SWG:

Another major update called the "New Game Enhancements" (abbreviated as NGE) was implemented on 15 November 2005, and created huge demonstrations in game from the majority of players, and became available in retail on 22 November 2005 as the Star Wars Galaxies: Starter Kit.^[43] Major changes included the reduction and simplification of professions, simplification of gameplay mechanics, and Jedi becoming a starting profession. Media outlets such as CBS News, New York Times, New York Post and Wired Magazine criticized the reduced depth and complexity of the game.,^{[44][45][46][47][48]} but John Smedley, president of Sony Online Entertainment, defended the decision claiming it necessary to revamp the game in order to reverse the deterioration they were seeing in the subscriber base.^[49] SOE offered refunds on the Trials of Obi-Wan expansion due to it being released two days before the NGE was implemented.^[50] The development team affirmed this was their desired direction for the game and that they would modify parameters to address player's concerns.^[51] Features such as expertise trees were later added to the game to add complexity and differentiation to characters. After the announcement that SOE had acquired the game Vanguard: Saga of Heroes, Smedley addressed that game's players about the perceived threat of major changes to the game:

We've learned a thing or two with our experiences with the NGE and don't plan on repeating mistakes from the past and not listening to the players.

—John Smedley, president of Sony Online Entertainment^[52]

And what does any of this have to do with them taking properties f2p? That is the entire point of this discussion is it not? 

That some star wars mmo fans are angry years later over a hot mess of a game has no bearing on the fact that SOE's experience with taking properties f2p has ranged from mediocre to good ... just like every other mmo publisher out there. We haven't seen one of their games designed from the start with f2p/cash shop in mind and we don't even know any details of their plans with PS2.

So my original point still stands, there's no side to argue here about PS2's payment structure.     tt??

If this article holds any water, they'll have a decent chance at success on the business end. How well they hold to that is what remains to be seen. Their general track record has shown they're perfectly capable of screwing up a perfectly smooth operation, but a broken clock is right twice a day, right?

Well one thing I know for certain, If I do end up playing Planetside 2, and I honestly am pretty interested in trying it out. There is no way in hades, I'm going to be entrusting SOE with my credit card or real identity. This will be the first time that I end up paying for anything with a game card ...and signing up as U.N. Known