Originally posted by Siveria

I especally agree on the devolopment part, Trion has really dropped the ball with defiance, Look at the one new bug with the new patch, where players were finally given the option to mute voice chat (no one wants to listen to some damn annoying teen yelling into the mic) But they somehow screwed it up and when you hit mute all, it mutes yourself, but no one else. How did something like this get past internal testing?

my theory is they have little in the way of QA and in order to test RIFT changes they just logged into WoW/EQ.

Originally posted by Sovrath

What about this part:

Game director Matt Firor says that the firm isn't using the engine as you may expect, though.

"Think of HeroEngine as a whiteboard for us –- a great tool to get some ideas in the game and start looking at them while the production engine was in development," he explains.

 

Also this:

“Our plan is for ESO to be a world class MMO, with the social features found in any MMO to date – so while we were prototyping the game on HeroEngine, we were simultaneously developing our own client, server, and messaging layer that were specifically designed with ESO in mind. Think of Hero Engine as a whiteboard for us – a great tool to get some ideas in the game and start looking at them while the production engine was in development,” he added.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/The-Elder-Scrolls-Online-Doesn-t-Use-the-Hero-Engine-Developer-Says-272344.shtml

all this means is at most TESO will have its own UI not using the engine tools. haha, nothing about the gameplay, visuals or performance will be changed by this....

if there were even 120 seconds of a character in an alpha build slashing the most retarded of mobs it would have funded after a week.

with the amount of KS showing alpha footage as a proof of concept, you can't talk 99.9% of the time and show some 3d models and call it a day.

Originally posted by Voiidiin

Originally posted by Rthuth434
it's easy to have quality control in RIFT when all it's parts are ripped straight from WoW and EQ2. you see what became of their non-WoW/EQ2 xeroxed designs in the game? bad class balance, the worst RvR thingamajig ever(yes, worse than Fusang even)....why be surprised now that they built a whole game outside of the formula that they've stuck so close to?

Thats very simple, i did not think Rift was a complete ripoff of WoW, yes it was a technical clone of WoW, but jeesh how many new MMO's are not ?

There are several things DefTrion can do to fix Defiance, i just do not see them doing it, and crap a 4.2 gig path that did nothing to change the game significantly ? 

- TRION added lot of flavor and slight differences, but at it's core besides WildStar it is the closest videogame to WoW, and i mean WOW. not "thempark", not EQ clone(none of these current themparks play like EQ, nto even WoW did which is why it was such a big deal). specifically it is WoW with a few fringe differences. because the total lack of discovery or risk in development they have been put on a pedestal as heroes(just followed the script perfectly, this is what the 70% of customers who left realized), but it's bunk and always has been, because there's not a single good feature in RIFT that isn't native to EQ 2 and/or WoW.

- What you're seeing with Defiance is their true nature as devs(it was apparent with EoN beta). they're little better than Funcom and this product shows it.

Originally posted by Wakygreek
Now here is the thing about the soul system, its not as great as a lot of people like to think it is. It gives you the illusion that there are more options then there really are. Most of the options it gives you just don't work, there are certain builds floating around the web on what people prefer you to use for your role in a group. The new expansion has added a few new souls but the system itself still suffers from limitations that were not fully thought through.

this.

as for what it does well? the same things WoW and EQ2 do well, as they've simply copied those things. now look at what RIFT(and TRION) do poorly(everything that they didn't xerox from blizz/SOE). class balance, RvR(lol so bad). now Defiance is riddled with as many probelms as a Funcom game.

but tera started as p2p, never had any prominent post launch content and is f2p and still sucks. f2p is just supposed to "suck" and converted games are supposed to have converted because they were not worthy and do not get worthwhile content. 

why has EQ2 had better content releaes than WoW since Cataclysm? them 9million subs are supposed to go into making the game worth it.

Originally posted by Waterlily

It did that for the years that it was P2P too, EQ released content for 10 years while P2P.

I don't think it has anything to do with F2P or P2P, technically EQ and EQ2 are not F2P, they are freemium games as SoE describes them, most players of EQ and EQ2 actually use a P2P subscription.

It's related to the game and their fanbase that keeps playing and demanding new content, it has nothing to do with the payment model.

apparently you're mistaken and it has everything to do with the payment model. that's what everyone says these days.

and really in the last three years beats every MMO in post launch content including WoW, RIFT(yes) and EVE.

why? how? it's not supppose to do that...being F2P and all.

Originally posted by Vorthanion

Originally posted by Rthuth434

Originally posted by Vorthanion
I sure hope this buisiness model collapses.  I'm tired of the crappy quality games that have resulted from this movement.

are you also tired of all the crappy quality P2P MMO's that continue to release?

I'll take subscription based SWTOR over any of the current F2P pieces of garbage anyday.

Originally posted by Vorthanion
As far as shooter MMOs go, I much prefer Planetside 2 over Defiance.

you take the free one with the more questionable item shop yet you act like a hardass anti f2p guy here. ok.

@ Fearum.

you're literally arguing something that i'm not.  i'm saying that if you want a game you can play for a long time that's fine, but the payment model won't dictate that as evidenced by this whole genre since its infancy.

Remember guys, most of you anit-f2p guys in this topic were beating your chests about it before mark came along and lifting up Funcom and TRION as your champions cause they were basically saying the same shit in a roundabout way. not long ago at all.  you're not without a good game to play because f2p, it's because most released suck and they happen to take a while to release. 

Originally posted by Fearum

Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now. 

that's cool, but what the creator charges you doesn't dictate if the game will be like this. take any of your hated f2p games, change the model and none of them magically becaome a for us, by us niche game that caters to your values. MJ is going to make such a game, that's good. but he's only saying what benefits his business in these interviews. payment model either way is a foolish rallying cry, and the overwhelming amount of shitty p2p mmo's should be pretty sobering evidence of that for you. 

this site especially is pretty much 90% people disappointed with every mmo out.....and you guys were like this from as long as i can remember...early 2000's before even WoW launched.. virtually everything was p2p then. back then many people here were just as frothing mad about SWG and DAoC too.

Originally posted by Fearum

Originally posted by Rthuth434

Originally posted by Fearum

Where are the invested players in these F2P games? Oh thats right there is no commitment to those games because they cater to people who just want a quick fix and then they are on to the next thing.

just like all the P2P MMO's that held 90% of their playerbase for a grand total of 34 days...?

And they are now F2P and doing great? LOL

A bad game is a bad game no matter what the pay model, not sure what your point it here but I think it was an attempt to be witty?

I think they should have just died instead of hanging around like a leach. They will eventually though.

the model doesn't dictate if the game will be bad or good though. acting like subs increase the chances or guarantee a product will be good goes against history.

from MJ's point of view, he can make a case for what is preferable...but he's just as wrong overall about F2P going anywhere as all the F2P chest beaters were about P2P going away. it's all here to stay, with many failures and some successes along the way.

no point in consumers choosing a side in payment models. you got three good p2p mmo's right now that are viable and actually getting support, and really the same number for non sub based...

Originally posted by MarkJacobs

Folks,

Actually, my thinking is this:

1) There are ton of publishers/developers trying to flood into the F2P space right now. These numbers continue to swell world-wide, including the US of course, year over year. Every time a publisher lays off a significant number of people, new studios are born. This, along with the belief that F2P is the next Internet Gold Rush will lead to even more developers and publishers getting into this space in the next couple of years. Look at EA's push into this space as an example of what is going on at other publishers but even more so in Asia. This will result in a glut of titles.

2) Many of these same developers/publishers are now spending what used to be thought of as PC-level amounts on F2P games. This trend will increase over the coming years, especially in light of EA's public statement that they are betting heavily on FTP/micro-trans. EA, like other major publishers, have the cash to spend more and more in the hope that this spend will help drive out the competition. This is something almost every, if not every, well-heeled publishers has tried to do over the decades.

3) There is an ever-increasing "race to the bottom" to not only offer F2P games but to make them cheaper in the beginning to get people to make an in-game buy and then hopefully keep them playing/paying.

4) As more and better quality F2P games hit the market (we need to think globally, developers across the world are turning out F2P games at an astonishing rate), more players will decide not to spend anything since they can simply move on to the another game. This is even truer when developers essentially clone other games.

5) An ever-increasing supply + prices heading downward are not a good combination unless you expect demand to substantially increase over the years (which is possible) but whether the demand outstrips the supply, well, we will have to see.

What I expect will happen is that a lot of small developers will get pushed out of the market because unlike 5 years ago, they can't compete the with amount of corporate spending on these games. While there will always be room for the indie surprise hit, 99% of game developers can't count on this. This failure will cause a lot of studios to close down.

In the meantime, publishers world-wide will continue to build F2P games in the hopes that they can have a hit such as LOL and build their own Riot Games. This too will lead to publishers eventually scaling back production and more publisher follies in trying to extract every possible cent they can from games that have failed to meet projections. This will end up hurting the F2P model but will then, I believe, lead to more players wanting the "good old days" of actually paying for a title and not being treating like walking wallets.

What will be left will be some great F2P games, some even better F2P studios (who have survived the shake-out) and some successful publishers who will then look for the next "One model to rule them all" as they have for decades.

Anyway, just wanted to clear that up. I don't expect all F2P games to go away as I have said for years (including my last panel at GDC) that there is, and always will be, room for multiple models in our industry.

Mark

P.S. I'm not saying this because of CU because frankly, CU is going to be a niche game regardless of what happens. If I'm wrong about what's coming, CU is still niche. If I'm right, CU will still remain niche.

anyone else see practically no diference between this scenario and what has become of P2P MMO's. change some words around and it's the same situation.

Originally posted by Fearum

Where are the invested players in these F2P games? Oh thats right there is no commitment to those games because they cater to people who just want a quick fix and then they are on to the next thing.

just like all the P2P MMO's that held 90% of their playerbase for a grand total of 34 days...?

Originally posted by Mkilbride

P2P games that are still P2P; regardless of success, are still turning a profit enough to not go F2P;

 

Rift(closing down over seas, had to fire 50 people and all the anit-f2p guys were the first to go. added a cash shop)
WoW(Obviously)(still huge churn rate and supplimental cash shop income)
FFXI(only SE game making money for the company, not an immaculate success objectively)
Dark Age of Camelot(maintenence mode for years and years already, dev team mostly gone)
Warhammer: Age of Reckoning(yeah, it's not F2P! Haha)(maintenence mode since like 7 months in, devs blowing in the wind company circling the drain)
Eve Online(niche, slow growth, extremely low expense, rules its own market. not AAA, and many players do not use the straight sub model for it anyway, they bot/trade their way to the game paying for itself)
FFXIV(lmfao. shut down, remade, sub suspended, going to flop again. it was subscription froo for98% of its lifetime you know)
Asherons Call(active development scope is nil, amking peanuts and nothing being put into content creation for the most part anymore)
Darkfall(lololol, might as well add mortal online to the list. this game represents a pipe dream that should die but a few hundred peopel can't let go of.)

hell, you forgot lineage. 16 years strong still played in high numbers, earns enough money to have its own place in a balance sheet quarterly and still RELEVANT. you can't even support your own argument.

Originally posted by Mkilbride

Originally posted by Valentina

Because his track record for long term success in subscription MMO's is so great, right?

 

F2P is not going to die in 3-5 years. I used to be a subscription purist, myself. Then I realized it's really not viable in today's economy & market, and the least appealing thing ever to the current generation of consumers. If anyhting, there will be an evolution somewhere down the line, but I think buy to play is the future of online gaming for a good long while.

Uh

 

His track record is great. Both DAOC & Warhammer are both still using a sub model, and appear to be making enough money to not be taken offline.

 

So I'd say yeah.

you left out that any type of game developement investment of any worth has ceased for both games ages ago. almost immediately for WAR. they're making literal peanuts on both games, while spending nothing but the light bill.

Originally posted by Dren_Utogi

I've paid more money to SOE alone using their item mall, and I've not used a subscription in over 3 years. Games are what make the , well the game, I doesn't matter if it is free to play or a subscription, if the game is crap, no one will pplay it.

Originally posted by gylnne

Originally posted by Nasa

Am I allowed to laugh if Camelot Unchained at some point turns into F2P?

Bioware for a long time almost denied that SWTOR would ever turn into F2P.

Yes and Bioware answers to it's share holders, CU answers to it's kickstarter backers.

correction, they answer to no one. such is the beauty in kickstarter(from the company/creator point of view).

Originally posted by Mkilbride

Tera is a pretty bad game overall, I had my fun with it, and made some money even.

 

However, Tera did do F2P Right.

you may have been disappointed but you're a little kid if you let it paint your world view that far. Guild Wars, and yes its sequel too are better than almost(gotta bold the almost) every P2P game that came out from the time GW was released.

there will be P2P releases this yea, they will have the same chance of being bad as always. same for the f2p ones. these games just have so little room for error but so much probability of error.