No thanks. I am crossing this game out from my list.

Good job, Smed, you lost another customer.

Also, you should not call it "free to play" when you have to pay to get into a certain area and use micro-transactions to advance. Micro-transactions are small by definition, but add up to exceed the usual subscription price, if you arent careful.

THAT IS NOT FREE.

Imagine if you had to pay $.05 dollars every time you went into a battlegrounds in WoW. Thats what Smed is asking.

That might work in China, but not in the west.

Also, if the future in western MMO market is micro-transactions, I will not be interested in playing MMOs anymore...

PAY ONCE FOR EVERYTHING, NOT UNLIMITED TIMES FOR SMALL FRACTIONS.

/golf clap

While I am not a supporter of microtransactions in general, there is a bright side. It is a way for players to get a chance to try the game for free and see if they want to go further.

More importantly, it opens the way for a better business model down the line. I hope that eventually the microtransaction model evolves into something where the purchases are purely aesthetic and have no affect on gameplay. I am certain there are enough people out there that would pay extra to have flashy gear and pets, etc rather than the generic stuff that everyone else has access to. Maybe also use the microtransaction system to purchase extra potions or something if you just don't feel like grinding for something. There are plenty of uses without hurting the people who don't want to micropay.

He's not saying that every time you enter an area you pay. He's just saying it would be a small fee , once, for permanent access to that area. Not much different than an expansion really. And not for all areas. You don't have to pay the $15/month so spending that same amount on fees to unlock new content would be fine. You only have to unlock it once and only if you choose to. It would likely save money. I like the idea.

Originally posted by Ammon777

No thanks. I am crossing this game out from my list.

 

Good job, Smed, you lost another customer.

 

Also, you should not call it "free to play" when you have to pay to get into a certain area and use micro-transactions to advance. Micro-transactions are small by definition, but add up to exceed the usual subscription price, if you arent careful.

 

THAT IS NOT FREE.

 

Imagine if you had to pay $.05 dollars every time you went into a battlegrounds in WoW. Thats what Smed is asking.

 

Looks like a another winner for SOE.

*add a hint of sarcasm here

John Smedley needs to step down from this CEO throne and crawl back to the shit hole he came from.

After the SWG fuckup, this jackass still thinks that he's contributing something new and innovative to the gaming world.

I have no problem with F2Play models if they are well thought out, if SOE can manage a well thought F2P model will have to be seen. 

Maybe this will work and we can get some older games that were canceled re-released as F2P.  Hey EA, how about giving Earth and Beyond a real chance this time?  Hmmm, I feel another thread about to be deleted by EA on their forums.....

So you are wanting folks paying the Station Pass, in addition to shell out money for the "velvet rope" access? 

This game looks really unique and sweet. I dislike microtransactions myself, ESPECIALLY in a competitive environment. Like, I don't know how Xbox360 and PS3 fans deal with it. They pay $65 a game as it is, and then $30~ for all the mini-packs of crap to get the stuff that the developers made for the game already, but removed so they could charge a little extra. $2 for this armor upgrade, $5 for the rocket launcher & laser cannon upgrade, it's bogus.

But, the plus side, at least with MMOGs or near-MMOGs (Hellgate: London) is that it lets people enjoy the game for free, which brings in subscribers (Anarchy Online's 3 odd year old froob program is proof of this,) and you it lets you select the content you want. Instead of paying $40 for an expansion, you can pay $20 for the new weapons and cool new class, but leave the new areas and what not out, cause you don't care about them. This is again something that Anarchy Online is going to be doing. Offering parts of their expansions at a reduce price for those that don't really care about the whole thing. It's a bold and innovative move. But if Funcom is known for anything, it's their innovative games.

But yea, like Hellgate: London, I'll be buying this. Even if it's only to enjoy the free stuff for a few months.

Originally posted by BeowulfAgate

 Hey EA, how about giving Earth and Beyond a real chance this time?  Hmmm, I feel another thread about to be deleted by EA on their forums.....

QFT!

I would love to see a F2P/Microtransaction based E&B come back. I really enjoyed that game. But it's EA, and they screw up everything (killing that game when it could really have easily been saved. Lesser companies with WAY less budget have saved other MMOGs that were even MORE on the ropes. Look at HORIZONS!) So it'll never happen.

Personally I am going to wait until it is further down the line to make a decision on this game. The game itself has promise but SOE can destroy what promise it had in a heartbeat.

As for F2P. It has many issues that come along with it and I hope SOE can iron these out. I doubt that if you are paying for station pass you will have to make any of the microtransactions. You will probably given all the extra goodies upfront. Others however will have to pay to gain access. If you don't know how this type of F2P model works then go look at MUonline that I believe K2 is running. They have certain events and areas that only members can access.

Also a big problem with F2P is that anyone can make an account and any number of accounts. Gold farmers, hackers, exploiters, and the like can play get banned, then make another account. It creates an environment that allows hacks and such to be developed with almost no penalty.

I hate the concept of micro transactions aka item shops and paying for added value content. A flat subscription rate is the best way to pay for a MMOG both because it keeps the playing field level which is essential in a MMOG and it ends up being less expensive than being nickel an dimed with additional fees. The point is kinda mute though since I refuse to play any SOE games.

I must also express my disliking of SOE haters.. I am not a fanboi or hater of any company. Each game is different from the previous games put out. If people weren't so close minded about gaming, things would be a lot easier on these forums =P

It also occurs to me that it is funny that people are hating on SOE for the subscription plan and also hating on them for the F2P business model in the same thread. SOE could cure cancer and there'd still be haters

Originally posted by Distaste

As for F2P. It has many issues that come along with it and I hope SOE can iron these out. I doubt that if you are paying for station pass you will have to make any of the microtransactions. You will probably given all the extra goodies upfront. Others however will have to pay to gain access.

I sure hope you are right. When I read the article, there was no comment of the Station Pass so it had me wondering.  I am going to keep an eye on this game, it looks really interesting. 

SOE would never introduce this system if they thought it would make less profit then the subscription based policy.

Why else would they change it, the system they have now works fine, right?

Originally posted by Elda

SOE would never introduce this system if they thought it would make less profit then the subscription based policy.

Why else would they change it, the system they have now works fine, right?

SOE should try this with SWG and VG, maybe than people can be convinced to give those crappy games a try lol

Originally posted by BaronJuJu

So you are wanting folks paying the Station Pass, in addition to shell out money for the "velvet rope" access? 

 

You should really learn to read before you post, it's a F2P, no station pass will be required.

Originally posted by Fion

 

Originally posted by BeowulfAgate

 Hey EA, how about giving Earth and Beyond a real chance this time?  Hmmm, I feel another thread about to be deleted by EA on their forums.....

 

QFT!

I would love to see a F2P/Microtransaction based E&B come back. I really enjoyed that game. But it's EA, and they screw up everything (killing that game when it could really have easily been saved. Lesser companies with WAY less budget have saved other MMOGs that were even MORE on the ropes. Look at HORIZONS!) So it'll never happen.

It was well known that when EA acquired Westwood, they agreed to keep E&B running for 2 years.  Guess how long the game was up?  Almost exactly 2 years from the release.  EA had no interest in the game, they were after C&C.  This has been confirmed by both former WW employees and EA employees that I know.

If you miss E&B, there is a very active community behind developing an emulator.  Just google for it and you will find them.

EA has the worst forums, kept crashing and disconnecting me while I was making my post.  I think they knew what I was up to and were screwing with me.

Originally posted by BeowulfAgate

Originally posted by BaronJuJu

So you are wanting folks paying the Station Pass, in addition to shell out money for the "velvet rope" access? 

 

You should really learn to read before you post, it's a F2P, no station pass will be required.

/sigh ok, I'll make it simpler for you

Yes, I realize its F2p....however my comments were geared towards the microtransactions aspect of it.  I was commenting that it would be crazy to have a Station Pass along with having to pay on top of that for the "velvet rope" access. However a friend told me that Smedley commented late last year that Station Pass customers are considered part of the "Velvet rope" access. I'm going to try and track down the exact comment.*

Next time, make sure when you make corny remarks that you are at least timely about it. I wrote that yesterday and commented further on it.

PS - I would love to see E&B come back

*Edit found it here a CGW article from 2005 entitled "Online Evolution"

""In the meantime, Sony Online, is trying something slightly more radical. “We believe very strongly that the future of MMO gaming is not just subscription based. In fact,” says SOE president John Smedley, “we’re going to put our money where our mouth is when we release our next big game in the fall of 2006.” The idea behind the new mystery title is this: The game is free—no level restrictions, no retail release, no BS. Download it and you’re good to go. “However,” says Smedley, “there will be a velvet rope area. We’re toying with the idea of charging $4.99 a month for a few extra bank slots or places to hold things.” Lusting after that flashy new designer armor? SOE will provide the ability to purchase “cosmetic items,” and Station Exchange (SOE’s version of an MMO eBay) will be available on all game servers. Of course, those signing up for Station Access get behind that “velvet rope” as well.

Originally posted by Szark

 There's going to be an aftermarket, and we want to control it so that players don't get duped into having something switched out from them."

Read more here.

Smedley is going to control the aftermarket so that i don´t get duped???

This is the same guy that switched my SWG for the NGE, right? and HE is going to see to it that i don´t get duped.

I wonder what color the sky is in his world.

With Sony's past history, I am disappointed. This will be a dead game before too long. I have a feeling that SOE will have the mind set as the rest of Sony. CHARGE EXTRA FOR EVERYTHING. I wonder how bad it will get with micro-trans. Have to pay per lvl?? You wanna PVP?? That will cost you. How about traveling to another land or world?? That may cost you too. Imagine SWG with the micro-trans in place and nothing worth a shit can be crafted only purchased from SOE. This will only lead to the darkside. Their greed may become overwelmingly obvious with this game. We will see. Only time will tell.

pay-for-content  --  "It would likely save money."

No.  Wrong.

Corporations do not design things to be LESS profitable for them.

If subscription-based were MORE profitable they woudl go with that.  Obviously SOE knows that micro transactions (aka IMPULSE buying aka "ooh i Need that shiny new toy!!!  now!!!") is significantly more profitable.

Companies make things to maximize Profit, not to make them more fun or affordable for  suckers  customers.

I personally like SOE.......

 They have a great line up.   I also like the Free to play business model ideas I have been seeing discussed recently.

 I don't level very fast these days, and most new content is put out to keep the higher level guys happy, so meanwhile, they get to pay for all the new content and keep the game alive, while I continue to play in the old content and level at my own pace.

  More or less, I see guild wars,,,,

 I should also add in Smedley is a tool.......so is McQuaid......SOE needs a Tool shed......

 This went from potential to toilet pretty fast. Of course like another guy stated, there is more money to make on this type of game with this model otherwise it would be pay to play.

You know,
I play games for entertainment
not to try to balance my budget.

I'm just fine with paying once monthly (Although I'd like to pay per day but that wouldn't make them More money so that's never going to happen--- But I can dream can't I?)
and then be done with it.

I don't want my economical situation to interfer with my spare time when I'm relaxing.

Also I'm not even going to begin talking about what kind of community F2P games bring....
(Yes yes I see the irony, I'm playing WoW. . . Atleast it's better than F2P games)
So, Smedley, you keep your great deal and enjoy... Whatever it is that you enjoy..
It's not customer care atleast so I won't dwelwe into Smedley's pleasures..

Originally posted by BaronJuJu

 

Originally posted by BeowulfAgate

Originally posted by BaronJuJu

So you are wanting folks paying the Station Pass, in addition to shell out money for the "velvet rope" access? 

 

You should really learn to read before you post, it's a F2P, no station pass will be required.

 

/sigh ok, I'll make it simpler for you

Yes, I realize its F2p....however my comments were geared towards the microtransactions aspect of it.  I was commenting that it would be crazy to have a Station Pass along with having to pay on top of that for the "velvet rope" access. However a friend told me that Smedley commented late last year that Station Pass customers are considered part of the "Velvet rope" access. I'm going to try and track down the exact comment.*

Next time, make sure when you make corny remarks that you are at least timely about it. I wrote that yesterday and commented further on it.

PS - I would love to see E&B come back

 

*Edit found it here a CGW article from 2005 entitled "Online Evolution"

""In the meantime, Sony Online, is trying something slightly more radical. “We believe very strongly that the future of MMO gaming is not just subscription based. In fact,” says SOE president John Smedley, “we’re going to put our money where our mouth is when we release our next big game in the fall of 2006.” The idea behind the new mystery title is this: The game is free—no level restrictions, no retail release, no BS. Download it and you’re good to go. “However,” says Smedley, “there will be a velvet rope area. We’re toying with the idea of charging $4.99 a month for a few extra bank slots or places to hold things.” Lusting after that flashy new designer armor? SOE will provide the ability to purchase “cosmetic items,” and Station Exchange (SOE’s version of an MMO eBay) will be available on all game servers. Of course, those signing up for Station Access get behind that “velvet rope” as well.

 

Please make it simpler, since it appears that you are contradicting yourself.  You start off complaining that you have to pay for the velvet rope access as a Station Pass member then produce a quote by Smedley stating the opposite.  My response was based on what I had read where it was stated that Station Pass member would have full access, which your quote backs up.  So what is the point of your post?

And I only have time to read the forums once a day at best, so I'm sorry my life is too busy for you.  I have better things to do than troll posts and worry about responses.  And putting your response in bold doesn't make up for a lack of logic in your post...

Lol good ol' Sony...Can they do anything right?

Remeber too, on top of The Agency, they are also releasing the MMO Free Realms. Its another F2P with "velvet rope" model, so they seem to be pretty keen on going down this path.

It will be interesting to see what they will make their DC MMO....F2P or P2P.

Its Free To Play for sure??

Smedley is such an idiot.  Everytime he opens his mouth, nonsense spews forth.

You have to wonder how long Sony will put up with his antics.   Considering the hot marketplace, should be pretty obvious that SOE has only one MMO in the top 5 and that won't be for long once some of these new games hit the ether.

I don't personally have anything against Sony. Of course, I wasn't playing any of the games which Sony supposedly came along and ruined, so they haven't done anything to personally tick me off.

The free to play model has the potential to bring in more money than the pay to play model because it has the potential to bring in more players. For instance, if you have a pay to play game that's $10 a month and you have 1,000 players, you're getting $10,000 a month. However, if you have a free to play game and you have 5,000 players, more players being attracted because it's free, and with some players spending more and some players spending less it works out to $5 a month per player, then you're getting $25,000 a month. So it works out to being less for each individual player, but more for the company.

Can we get someone in here that is currently happily engaged in a game that uses microtransactions?

I've tried one, Mobinogi, and didn't get hooked enough to form a real opinion from playing alone. Sitting here now, i am aginst the idea. I understand that in theory it has the ability to potentially bring in more folks, which coul lead to more profits and a more successful game, BUT we have seen that it certainly is not necessary in order to ensure a broad and growing playerbase. I just don't like it, as most of you have already stated, and i'd like to hear from the other side of the fence to see if my views are unfounded.

Oh well. I was going to look into the Agency. *sigh*

Microtransaction games are a sucker-bet. Just say no.

We've just finished a discussion on this in the general area. (More than one actually.)

Microtransaction games are a rip-off. They are NEVER good for the player.

For me, this game is a casualty of SOE CS.  I was never really motivated by this title, but I was planning to purchase it, if only to try it and to encourage different games, most likely quitting within the first week, but eh, who knows?

But after they mess it up and apply monthly fees for PotBS AFTER I cancel...this game is going to take the first hit, as I am vindicative.  It is not about the amount of money, it is about the principle, the trust.  If someone hit the cancel button, it is over.  If you mess it, then you check your log to see when the player stop playing.

It is a shame as the devs there have little to do with the CS and the big brother thingy, but there is no way I will let's bad charging behaviors go unpunished.

Originally posted by psyconius

I must also express my disliking of SOE haters.. I am not a fanboi or hater of any company. Each game is different from the previous games put out. If people weren't so close minded about gaming, things would be a lot easier on these forums =P

 

It also occurs to me that it is funny that people are hating on SOE for the subscription plan and also hating on them for the F2P business model in the same thread. SOE could cure cancer and there'd still be haters

i've tried every game SOE has on it's station pass.  i am completely under-impressed by all of them.  maybe it's just that a lot of other games seem SOOOOOOOOOO much better in comparison?  maybe it's because the station-pass-games are exactly what smed's goal is -- to have a bunch of average games on the station pass?

who knows.

i somehow doubt soe will ever have anything wonderful (read - cure cancer, or ANYTHING wonderful).  all you have to do is attach 'soe is publishing' to a game, and you can pretty much write that game off as garbage.  if soe doesn't force a game out early, then they're "helping" out games that are pretty crappy to start with and just sort of buying them out and stuff.

this game COULD be good.  this game COULD be great.  it's related to soe; it won't be.  soe doesn't buy/produce/publish GREAT games.  sorry.

this game COULD be good.  this game COULD be great.  it's related to soe; it won't be.  soe doesn't buy/produce/publish GREAT games.  sorry.

SWG is still making money or else they would shut it down

EQ2 has a strong subscriber base

It's a no brainer here, if SOE wasnt making money and if the sum of all their games was in the red, they would shut down servers! Frankly some of you haters dont really have much of a logic sense in you. They would probably shut down servers that arent generating money first and then try to consolidate servers as well. Which they have done and will do as their sub base shrink.

You guys need a good shake of your head.

Also this game is gona be frikkin free! Why are you even bitching again? I guess you probably figure that SOE has to pay you to have the honor to have you play their game?

If you dont like it, if it doesnt appeal to you just dont play! How's that for an idea?

Originally posted by senadin

 

this game COULD be good.  this game COULD be great.  it's related to soe; it won't be.  soe doesn't buy/produce/publish GREAT games.  sorry.

Yes and Everquest hasnt been around for 10 years.

UO has been around a couple of years longer than EQ.  not sure where your point of quality/quantity is at here.  you saw where i capitalized the word GREAT for emphasis, yes?  i've tried and retried the SOE games and i can't honestly categorize any of them in the GREAT category. 

SWG is still making money or else they would shut it down  rolling in the cash, didn't they just double the number of servers swg has?  oh wait.

EQ2 has a strong subscriber base

 yummy, another cookie-cutter fantasy game to be bored out of my mind in when they start talking raiding.  YAY!

It's a no brainer here, if SOE wasnt making money and if the sum of all their games was in the red, they would shut down servers! Frankly some of you haters dont really have much of a logic sense in you. They would probably shut down servers that arent generating money first and then try to consolidate servers as well. Which they have done and will do as their sub base shrink.

 and didn't vanguard shut down servers? swg also shut down servers? what about the others in the harem?  doesn't take a huge amount of subs to keep a game afloat, especially if servers get shut down.  no brainer indeed, so much whining and blind faith in companies that will ignore you completely and laugh at you when they finally break enough games to irk you.  bravo.

You guys need a good shake of your head.

 mcdonald's has a HUGE following. i don't normally eat at mcdonald's. i want a bit more QUALITY for my buck.  yup, need to be shaking something somewhere.  maybe we should settle for bacon that's raw and been run over by a truck?  or, station pass games.   same same.

 

Also this game is gona be frikkin free! Why are you even bitching again? I guess you probably figure that SOE has to pay you to have the honor to have you play their game?

 so sowwy dramafested-one.  again, i was talking about quality.  i don't really play any free to play games cuz a lot of them don't interest me because of ... quality.

If you dont like it, if it doesnt appeal to you just dont play! How's that for an idea?

 but then, you would have nothing to cry online about...

it shouldn't be player vs player, it should be players vs gaming companies; but alas, we have the fanboi camp to destroy what could be great games.  kudos and bravo indeed.

I dont like that at all.

First, F2P means TONS of freeloaders, kids and ppl I dont want around, see Guild Wars. Never seen more immature Pron/Trash talking ppl than there.

Second, it means usually low quality and every really interesting stuff is bound to extra coin, which drives the REAL cost usually much higher than a constant subscription rate.

I am outta there too, Smed.

Originally posted by Elikal

....

First, F2P means TONS of freeloaders, kids and ppl I dont want around, see Guild Wars. Never seen more immature Pron/Trash talking ppl than there.

Second, it means usually low quality and every really interesting stuff is bound to extra coin, which drives the REAL cost usually much higher than a constant subscription rate.

...

And that's how it makes money.

Everyone joins 'cause it's free.  Then the players who like the game - but dislike the F2P crowd and the 'trash talk' complain.
Answer: If you don't like it pay for *premium* access and get your own *special area* and *special forums*.
So, they pay.

But they can come out of their area to pwn the kiddies - which (despite their self proclaimed maturity) they do.

So, the kiddies cry to mommy.  "Mommy!  I wan teh *Elite Bullet Proof Vest*!  I want teh *James Bombed Tuxedo*!  Please mommy!  It's only $5... Please please please please please....
Then they get that and the "To Russia with Love" mission is another small fee ($0.50) but the reward is teh Laser Beam Watch!  "MOMMY!!!!!"

And Mommy does not realise this is all adding up... or does not care because it keeps them quiet and stops them fighting with each other...

"MOMMY!  I just got pwned" sob sob "and I can't beat him back without the *SLR Delux Sniper rifle and Heat Scope!*"  sob sob... "Mommy...pleeeaaaaaaaase?"

That and people with no life and tons of money who are happy to PAY for the top gear to see their name on the top of the "Agency Double Oh Agents" list.

And the people who paid to get away from the trash talkers find they are followed to the *Special Places* by them... they complain
Answer: They paid their money just like you...

The only positive is that this sort of game really caters to gankers and griefers... but it makes them PAY for the privilage.

Originally posted by Ammon777

No thanks. I am crossing this game out from my list.

 

Good job, Smed, you lost another customer.

 

Also, you should not call it "free to play" when you have to pay to get into a certain area and use micro-transactions to advance. Micro-transactions are small by definition, but add up to exceed the usual subscription price, if you arent careful.

 

THAT IS NOT FREE.

 

Imagine if you had to pay $.05 dollars every time you went into a battlegrounds in WoW. Thats what Smed is asking.

 

That might work in China, but not in the west.

 

Also, if the future in western MMO market is micro-transactions, I will not be interested in playing MMOs anymore...

 

PAY ONCE FOR EVERYTHING, NOT UNLIMITED TIMES FOR SMALL FRACTIONS.

 

/golf clap

Agreed!!  SOE has done it again - out of touch with the players as usual and out of touch with reality most of the time.

I am sure that if you added up all the micro transaction items, you know the stuff you would normally get for your normal monthly subscription, it will add up to be MORE than what a monthly sub would of cost.

They are money grabbing fools, who stick it to gamers any chance they get.

They have calculated that if a gamer wants to experience the whole game it wil cost them more than what they would normally pay for a monthly subsctiption.  T

THAT is their only motivation, more profit and that is why they are doing this - because it will bring them more money and cost us more money than a monthly sub.  You don't think they would even consider this model if it didn't mean MORE money for them.

I for one will not touch this game now, we need to make a stand now or be crapped on forever by these companies.

I think people are looking at this the wrong way.  The Agency is going to be a persistent First Person Shooter and therefore its competition, although persistent, will really be with other shooters.  Is anyone here paying a subscription for TF2, CoD, BF**42, etc? The sanswer is no. 

If SOE really wants to pick up that shooter crowd, then by default, they can't be charging a subscription for a type of game everyone else is playing for free after the initial software purchase.  They can make money with the velvet rope though, which is the objective of any business.  If you don't like microtransactions and don't want to play because of it, that's all well and good but spouting off rhetoric about being out of touch with the consumer base is a bit silly. Clearly you aren't the primary demographic -- it's the shooter crowd they're looking to rope in with microtransactions.

I would rather pay a monthly fee.  But if the game is any good, I might give it a go.

I think the folks who get addicted to these games will be the hardest hit, and the potential for spending more than 15 bucks a month is high.  On the other hand, if you are playing casually, it might actually work out to be cheaper.

The problem I have with the microtransaction model is it basically allows the company to print their own money.  For instance, suppose you need a certain weapon to advance, so you buy it.  All they have to do is make monsters tougher, then you need to get the new gun they are selling.  And with SOE's record of continual nerfs, I can see how people wil be demanding their money back when in one fell swoop SOE makes there newly purchased weapon obsolete.

Smed is the devil of gaming.  He is the worst influence in this industry.  I'm sure he has lots of money, so I wish he would just retire.