I do. It'll atrract new customers, which means more people to use their item shop. They can get more subs as people who left because of the dying population would return.

Originally posted by Lashley

I do. It'll atrract new customers, which means more people to use their item shop. They can get more subs as people who left because of the dying population would return.

Thats the ideal situation with every MMO wanting to go F2P, but its not always going to happen.

It feels its a bit too late for Vanguard to me, but hey, good game is a good game right?

Actually I think its fucking BS, that SOE came right out and said that changing Vanguard to a F2P would be too much work, then a few weeks later we get this BS of an MMO as a F2P.  Just goes to show as ever that SOE are still scared of the success that V:SoH would be, and overshadow their precious Everquest series.

Now I don't doubt it'll get the F2P treatment someday, but only after their EQ Next has been launched and all the greatness of Vanguard has been taken for use there. 

If Sony wants this game to continue, and is willing to support a small dev team, F2P with a cash shop is probably the way to go.  I wonder if it would be better (for us and them) if they sold it to someone else though.

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

I really hope not...

I believe the player group that Vanguard could and should attract, would prefer the sub model

To me cash shops really break immersion

If you could play both ways with no change in the sub model. Well... I think that would be great

Originally posted by Lashley

I do. It'll atrract new customers, which means more people to use their item shop. They can get more subs as people who left because of the dying population would return.

Your assuming the license to distribute Vangaurd that SOE has allows them to do F2P.  I don't think SOE owns the ultimate IP of Vangaurd and licenses from others.

I think DC proly forced this on SoE....its not like them to give anything away...at all

SOE has become the epitome of ineptitude. They never do the right thing or if they try to do the right thing they do it the wrong way with little to no quality control. Even with their biggest games like EQ2, the testing and implementation of their updates and changes fail at almost every level.

so yea, Don't hold your breath about anything good happening with Vanguard.

SOE promised updates & developments for VG. There have been some bugs fixed last month, so the question is what next?

I highly doubt SOE will make new content for the current 500 players. It'll just cost too much for SOE to do this; they'll never get the investment back. So that leaves an other option - F2P conversion of VG to get more playeds in (hence the recent bugfixes), and when there's a larger playerbase, they'll drop in the content update...

Just my 2cents...

Originally posted by udon

Originally posted by Lashley

I do. It'll atrract new customers, which means more people to use their item shop. They can get more subs as people who left because of the dying population would return.

Your assuming the license to distribute Vangaurd that SOE has allows them to do F2P.  I don't think SOE owns the ultimate IP of Vangaurd and licenses from others.

I don't know with absolute certainty. But I believe SOE purchased everything concerning VG from the bankrupt Sigil.

---

Originally posted by Reizla
SOE promised updates & developments for VG. There have been some bugs fixed last month, so the question is what next?
I highly doubt SOE will make new content for the current 500 players. It'll just cost too much for SOE to do this; they'll never get the investment back. So that leaves an other option - F2P conversion of VG to get more playeds in (hence the recent bugfixes), and when there's a larger playerbase, they'll drop in the content update...
Just my 2cents...

---

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

If I read the SWG notice correctly, it was LA that made the ultimate decsion to stop SWG. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I think the possiblity is good for F2P Vanguard because of some of the stuff Smed said in the Massively interview:

"John Smedley: Not at all. We have a very strong belief in the future of the F2P business model. We've got our own ideas, and we feel very strongly that this is the future of the industry. We're certainly exploring it ourselves very deeply, and you can expect more announcements in the near future.

Massively: Does that mean that all SOE games will be free-to-play at some future point?

John Smedley: The statement I would make is that we view free-to-play as the future, and we're very interested in it and excited about it. I'm leaving a little bit of room there because business models evolve over time. You can look for some announcements about current games in the future, and we're really looking closely at it. We like the model."

Originally posted by WhiteLantern

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

If I read the SWG notice correctly, it was LA that made the ultimate decsion to stop SWG. Correct me if I'm wrong.

 

I think the possiblity is good for F2P Vanguard because of some of the stuff Smed said in the Massively interview:

"John Smedley: Not at all. We have a very strong belief in the future of the F2P business model. We've got our own ideas, and we feel very strongly that this is the future of the industry. We're certainly exploring it ourselves very deeply, and you can expect more announcements in the near future.

Massively: Does that mean that all SOE games will be free-to-play at some future point?

John Smedley: The statement I would make is that we view free-to-play as the future, and we're very interested in it and excited about it. I'm leaving a little bit of room there because business models evolve over time. You can look for some announcements about current games in the future, and we're really looking closely at it. We like the model."

I believe that this quote is from the same massively article :" The decision to shut down SWG is first and foremost a business decision mutually agreed upon between SOE and LucasArts. LucasArts has a new game coming out, and the contract would be running out in 2012 anyway, so we feel like it's the right time for the game to end."

So, in turn, all the players that stuck with SWG through thick and thin get a pink slip because SWTOR is coming out. But wait! They have Clone Wars to turn to!

Smedly is right, F2P is the crutch of the future.

SOE is greedy for money so yes I would say eventually they will make Vanguard F2P. The game has low pop and they keep it open.

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

      I agree that SOE is unlikely to convert Vanguard to F2P. The only case where they might change their minds is if everything on their station pass has a F2P version....which is almost a reality. Who knows.

     Comparing Vanguard to SWG is moot. SWG galaxies required SOE to re-license from Lucas...and I'm willing to bet Lucas wasn't willing . Even if they were...it just wasn't worth costs..the license is probably more than 5 years worth of revenues from SWG..and that's being conservative.. That coupled with the security/privacy issue costs SOE incurred recently....and you can hardly cast blame. Well..you can always cast blame I guess..thats easy for fans of an MMO these days.( myself included)

    Vanguard is owned outright by SOE. They could run that game forever on fumes and probably still make a small profit because they dedicated very,very few resources towards its maintenance. Or so it seems. You'd think they could funnel a bit of money to convert it to f2p and make a killing, though it is unlikely to come close to their other fantasy mmo..EQ2..which already has a F2p model  that does fairly well.

Originally posted by BarCrow

      I agree that SOE is unlikely to convert Vanguard to F2P. The only case where they might change their minds is if everything on their station pass has a F2P version....which is almost a reality. Who knows.

That's my opinion also.  There's no urgency to do it now.  Without a doubt dev/publishers drool at cash shops and the potential income.  It could be in progress already.  Given a staff of maybe 5, that's a ton of work to do well especially since it wasn't designed for F2P originally.

Originally posted by BarCrow

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

      I agree that SOE is unlikely to convert Vanguard to F2P. The only case where they might change their minds is if everything on their station pass has a F2P version....which is almost a reality. Who knows.

     Comparing Vanguard to SWG is moot. SWG galaxies required SOE to re-license from Lucas...and I'm willing to bet Lucas wasn't willing . Even if they were...it just wasn't worth costs..the license is probably more than 5 years worth of revenues from SWG..and that's being conservative.. That coupled with the security/privacy issue costs SOE incurred recently....and you can hardly cast blame. Well..you can always cast blame I guess..thats easy for fans of an MMO these days.

    Vanguard is owned outright by SOE. They could run that game forever on fumes and probably still make a small profit because they dedicated very,very few resources towards its maintenance. Or so it seems. Its seems they could funnel a bit of money to convert it to f2p and make a killing but it unlikely to come close to their other fantasy mmo..EQ2..which already has a F2p model  that does fairly well.

I don't think it is a moot comparison when they refuse to spend the resources on VG as you said in your post as of currently. SOE also posted that it would take a large portion of resources to convert SWG over. Now on the subtopic of resources, when SOE refuses to spend on VG or SWG now, why would they do so in the future? Just because they own the IP outright means that they want to spend the 1) time and 2) money in the conversion process.

Is past performance indicative of future results?

Edited to say: I really hope I am wrong. I would hate to see the faithful community of Vanguard fall to the same fate as SWG's.

Originally posted by Inktomi

Originally posted by BarCrow

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

      I agree that SOE is unlikely to convert Vanguard to F2P. The only case where they might change their minds is if everything on their station pass has a F2P version....which is almost a reality. Who knows.

     Comparing Vanguard to SWG is moot. SWG galaxies required SOE to re-license from Lucas...and I'm willing to bet Lucas wasn't willing . Even if they were...it just wasn't worth costs..the license is probably more than 5 years worth of revenues from SWG..and that's being conservative.. That coupled with the security/privacy issue costs SOE incurred recently....and you can hardly cast blame. Well..you can always cast blame I guess..thats easy for fans of an MMO these days.

    Vanguard is owned outright by SOE. They could run that game forever on fumes and probably still make a small profit because they dedicated very,very few resources towards its maintenance. Or so it seems. Its seems they could funnel a bit of money to convert it to f2p and make a killing but it unlikely to come close to their other fantasy mmo..EQ2..which already has a F2p model  that does fairly well.

I don't think it is a moot comparison when they refuse to spend the resources on VG as you said in your post as of currently. SOE also posted that it would take a large portion of resources to convert SWG over. Now on the subtopic of resources, when SOE refuses to spend on VG or SWG now, why would they do so in the future? Just because they own the IP outright means that they want to spend the 1) time and 2) money in the conversion process.

Is past performance indicative of future results?

Edited to say: I really hope I am wrong. I would hate to see the faithful community of Vanguard fall to the same fate as SWG's.

   I get you. My "moot comparison" was mostly the fact that SWG requires an IP license whereas Vanguard is owned outright.  Both were relatively ignored by SOE it's true .

   SWG..i believe was ignored mostly because..after they screwed the pooch initially  (and by "they" I mean both SOE and Lucas..but I believe Lucas greed was mostly the culprit in this case..despite the "official" statements by any SOE employee or Lucas rep) ..and especially after the announcement of TOR a few years ago..SOE never intended to renew the License due to monetary factors. (and again..I don't think Lucas sincerely offered a renewal).

    Vanguard was ignored mainly because they could. It probably cost little to maintain and still brought in some small profit without seriously interfering with the EQ franchise populations and revenue

Originally posted by BarCrow

Originally posted by Inktomi

Originally posted by BarCrow

Originally posted by Inktomi

No, because this is the same company that is shutting down Star Wars Galaxies. When the SWG community begged them to make it F2P their answer was, "No, because it would take an incredible amount of resources to do so, resources that are going to be used somewhere else" meaning DC Universe Online. 

SOE would probably shut it down before they convert it.

      I agree that SOE is unlikely to convert Vanguard to F2P. The only case where they might change their minds is if everything on their station pass has a F2P version....which is almost a reality. Who knows.

     Comparing Vanguard to SWG is moot. SWG galaxies required SOE to re-license from Lucas...and I'm willing to bet Lucas wasn't willing . Even if they were...it just wasn't worth costs..the license is probably more than 5 years worth of revenues from SWG..and that's being conservative.. That coupled with the security/privacy issue costs SOE incurred recently....and you can hardly cast blame. Well..you can always cast blame I guess..thats easy for fans of an MMO these days.

    Vanguard is owned outright by SOE. They could run that game forever on fumes and probably still make a small profit because they dedicated very,very few resources towards its maintenance. Or so it seems. Its seems they could funnel a bit of money to convert it to f2p and make a killing but it unlikely to come close to their other fantasy mmo..EQ2..which already has a F2p model  that does fairly well.

I don't think it is a moot comparison when they refuse to spend the resources on VG as you said in your post as of currently. SOE also posted that it would take a large portion of resources to convert SWG over. Now on the subtopic of resources, when SOE refuses to spend on VG or SWG now, why would they do so in the future? Just because they own the IP outright means that they want to spend the 1) time and 2) money in the conversion process.

Is past performance indicative of future results?

Edited to say: I really hope I am wrong. I would hate to see the faithful community of Vanguard fall to the same fate as SWG's.

   I get you. My "moot comparison" was mostly the fact that SWG requires an IP license whereas Vanguard is owned outright.  Both were relatively ignored by SOE it's true .

   SWG..i believe was ignored mostly because..after they screwed the pooch initially  (and by "they" I mean both SOE and Lucas..but I believe Lucas greed was mostly the culprit in this case..despite the "official" statements by any SOE employee or Lucas rep) ..and especially after the announcement of TOR a few years ago..SOE never intended to renew the License due to monetary factors. (and again..I don't think Lucas sincerely offered a renewal).

    Vanguard was ignored mainly because they could. It probably cost little to maintain and still brought in some small profit without seriously interfering with the EQ franchise populations and revenue

I am not going to harp on the compare and contrast of SWG to VG. But one thing we do agree on is that SOE has a habit of ignoring games that aren't doing too as well as they would like and leaning resources to ones that are. KNowing this brought me to my initial reaction to the OP's question.

Again, I really hope I am wrong on this, since there was a thread here in support of VG, showing some people still like the game. If SOE sundowned VG regardless of IP ownership or not would show me that they really don't care about their userbase. I would hate to see that. I'd rather see them (SOE) make it free.