| 100 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
8/14/12 9:41:17 AM#81
Originally posted by Nitth Not really, subs will make people "jump ship" a hell of alot faster since there is an ongoing cost involved. Why would I keep wasting money to see if something improve and will probably take a few months. With B2P, it costs nothing to wait and you can keep playing till you see the improvements you want. BOOYAKA! |
|
|
Alot
Hard Core Member
Joined: 1/04/11
Minister of Propaganda for GW2 Fascist-Capitalist Party |
8/14/12 9:44:24 AM#82
PS2 isn't even an RPG. It's a 100% PvP First-Person Shooter structured like an MMO. And it will probably be a niche game. |
|
8/14/12 9:49:15 AM#83
Originally posted by The_Korrigan
LOTRO grew until 2010 (through the Shadows of Mirkwood expansion (post Moria)) and peaked at just over 250K if I remember right. Then they went F2P because Turbine saw how much more porfitable that model was. And that made the subs grow to their all time high (over 600k, pushing 700k) under the hybrid model through 2011 (and RoI). In 2012 the game crashed in subs to just under the 2010 numbers (somewhere around 225K).
I do agree on TSW going F2P faster. That was built into the game. The hybrid model used by LOTRO, DCUO, DDO, STO and many other games is far more profitable for small MMOs with dedicated fan bases than the pure-sub model. I think Funcom would have been stupid to not go box/sub with the initial release and not prepare for a hybrid model down the path.
I just don't see that the proposition that things are 'desperate' is warrented. I think Funcom knew they'd be hammered by the critics because that's how it works. It doesn't matter what you do today, you're bolstered (BioWare) or slammed (Funcom) for what you did in the past... |
|
|
8/14/12 9:52:40 AM#84
Originally posted by MosesZD You should give LOTRO more credit, it actually started with 300k subs in 2007 at release ;) And no, it peaked at Moria, and followed a long slope downwards since then. It went F2P because the subs were getting too low, and also a big part of the player base was lifetimers not paying a cent anymore. Make the game first P2P, perfectly knowing you will make it F2P in the year after release, and sell expensive lifetime accounts... what a nice cash cow model :) Originally posted by MosesZD Oh yes, they even did a nice little scam that no fan will ever acknowledge with their lifetime accounts... since I'm pretty confident they know they will go free to play since long before release. It's called "milk the cash cow", just like Turbine does now with their pay to win F2P model. |
|
|
8/14/12 9:54:24 AM#85
Originally posted by MosesZD
that is interesting. wasn't TSW praised for its relatively smooth release? especially considering it was Funcom i never heard anyone with issues at the release of that game. i'm asking honestly as i don't read reviews but i do know the game ran great when i played it and i encountered almost no bugs. am i in a bubble? was i just fortunate to miss all the issues with the game miraculously? or did they just pan it because its funcom? |
|
|
8/14/12 10:33:39 AM#86
Originally posted by Graey Well Final Fantasy 14 2.0 is just a different game.
There is nothing left from the old game. |
|
|
8/14/12 10:41:58 AM#87
Having played both Secret World and Guild Wars 2, there is a major flaw in that post. Guild Wars 2 is way better than the Secret World. At least at earlier levels that we have seen. I doubt very much that The Secret World is going to bring back any sort of player base from Guild Wars 2. The Secret World is not a bad game, but it felt inferior to Guild Wars 2 in every way. If/When people do leave Guild Wars 2, it would probably be to go back to WoW or something. Not TSW. |
|
|
8/14/12 10:52:22 AM#88
Originally posted by Normike If you expect a free game then yes but if you accept that F2P isn't actually free then the LOTRO model is one of the least bad ones (or best ones depending your opinion). Look at it this way, either you unlock chunks of content when you have the money and/or want to play it and have it unlocked forever or you pay a sub. If say you spend 100 bucks in the lotro store to unlock everything you want (which is very well possible if you make use of promotional offers and certain things like swift travel and trait slots remain unlocked if you sub for 1 month and then cancel again), then after 7-8 months playing you already payed less than someone who has a sub and has to remain subscribed to access all content. As opposed to you, who whenever you login will have access to everything you bought until the servers shut down. Oh and you can't buy any useful weapons in the store, just some starter crap stuff that you outlevel within a day playing anyways and buying skills in the store that you can else get through gameplay is just plain stupid imo. |
|
|
8/15/12 9:21:06 AM#89
Originally posted by DragonPop11 Desperate is exactly the right word for that post... Wow. |
|
|
8/15/12 9:39:06 AM#90
Originally posted by colddog04 those who played WoW, as their main MMO, or it as their first MMO, they wont play anyother game for more than 1-2 months they will go back to WoW again or they will stop the genre disgusted from WoW ...
|
|
|
8/15/12 9:53:28 AM#91
there is also one thing about GW2 that every one seams to be missing. something they tested at the end of every BEW.
they where testing the system to inject content into the game live at will any time they went with out have to shut server down or have you download a new patch take hungergames at the end of BE3 they put togeather in 15 min.
no one has a system like that and all it would take is do fo some big event once a week they you may never see again and it will keep a lot of player playing
|
|
|
8/15/12 10:44:08 AM#92
Originally posted by Loke666 B2P wouldn't really change much, at least for player retention. Many people left when the story was done and meeting the old gear grind, not liking the game, people that got tired of doing dungeons or people that got 10.4 completed and done with for them meaningful stuff in the ability wheel. All things irrelevant to having a subcription or not. |
|
|
8/15/12 11:16:11 AM#93
Originally posted by natuxatu I think many will come back for the two new playfields, a few monthly updates and maybe to some degree the 10 man raid. It will most likely be only for one month though.
That is at least when I plan to buy TSW :) |
|
|
8/15/12 12:12:54 PM#94
Originally posted by natuxatu This is absolutely a reasonable stance to take. GW2 is your jam more than TSW. I strongly disagree with you on story though. PvP wise? GW2 wins hands down.
TSW fans are rabid. They're fighting for the survival of the game they love. Would you be any different if ANet and GW2 was in a similar situation?
|
|
|
8/15/12 12:20:10 PM#95
Originally posted by Normike I still have days left of my first 30 included days and I am bored already. I found the combat one dimensional and was bored. The quests were cool, but that's it. Current: GW2 (almost) |
|
|
8/15/12 1:16:26 PM#96
Originally posted by Nitth
Being B2P also makes it easier for people to drop in now and again. I often do not drop in on other games for say, a weekends worth of play.. because I don't want to front that 15 dollars. I don't have that problem with GW1 or GW2. |
|
|
heartless
Novice Member
Joined: 1/05/04
Imagination will often carry us to worlds that never were. But without it we go nowhere. -Carl Sagan |
8/15/12 1:27:39 PM#97
Even if Funcom does follow that poster's advice and does a major relaunch initiative in October, I fear that it will do TSW little good. They need to fix their game before any relaunch. Last time I checked, besides broken quests, the chat still didn't work for some people. How do you launch an MMO and still have broken chat a month after the game's release? The game was released buggy and unfinished and sold poorly because of it, with an even poorer retention due to the heavy reliance on story content and lack of any emergent game play elements and no serious replay value. The sad thing is that because the game did poorly, Funcom will probably lay off a large chunk of their staff, which would mean slower bug fixes and less frequent update patches. Which, in turn, means even poorer sales and account retention. Barring a miracle, I highly doubt that TSW will bounce back.
|
|
8/15/12 1:31:06 PM#98
Originally posted by heartless Yep... Kind of hard to hype and push things on us after most of us experienced AOC first hand. Rinse and repeat. |
|
|
8/15/12 1:32:51 PM#99
People who think everyone's going to stop playing GW2 after a month are in for a sad reality.
no GW2 won't kill WoW, but it's time to move on and quit worrying about those people still playing it. - eyelolled |
|
|
8/15/12 1:37:05 PM#100
Originally posted by JoeyMMO This. God, how many times do people have to say this in order for those claiming "you can have both sub and B2P at the same time" to get it? Some people will pay for both, but at its core, the idea is not logical. If I'm enjoying a B2P game, I'm not going to pay for a sub of something that's collecting dust. Anyone who thinks GW2 will not directly impact TSW sales and subs is really, really in the dark. no GW2 won't kill WoW, but it's time to move on and quit worrying about those people still playing it. - eyelolled |
|