Trending Games | World of Warcraft | ArcheAge | Destiny | Guild Wars 2

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,860,358 Users Online:0
Games:742  Posts:6,246,891
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search
56 posts found
  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19849

12/08/12 12:12:34 PM#41
Originally posted by OG_Zorvan
Originally posted by bingbongbros

 

If you never intend to actually be a loyal customer to this mmo then why do you even bother playing it?  MMo's are dependent on their communities along with their revenue.

Let me explain something to you, and others that seem to share your "unique" train of thought.

Most of us are not here to "support" any developer, publisher, or combination thereof, be they "AAA" or "Indie".

We do not go to a movie  to "support" the theater, the director, the producer, or anyone else even remotely connected to the movie. We go to the movie for entertainment. Plain and simple.

Another thing the movie and MMO's have in common?

Neither one is an "investment". They are "products" and "services" that incur "expenses".

And when the product and/or service no longer justifies the expense, we move on.

I, and many others, have played a few MMO's over the years FOR years. I, and many others, have also played many MMO's over the years that I/we never even made it through the first month.

The only difference in these MMO's were some continually justified their expense, and others didn't.

And as for the "investment" part ( which was not in your quote but seems to be one of the favorite catchphrases people use now to tell us why we're supposed to "support the indie dev " regardless of outcome ), until I see a quarterly dividend check from any of these publishers, devs, or combinations thereof, be they "AAA" or "Indie", there is no "investment" other than my time.

And I owe my time to noone.

 

 

Well said. I think some here are just too attached, emotionally, to their entertainment products. Or even worse ... attached to an mirage of an ideal entertainment product in their minds. Thus, they have to be loyal to it. They have to "support" it. They probably have to "love" it too.

So sad.

  Nitth

Elite Member

Joined: 7/29/10
Posts: 3306

Magic Propels my Rolly Chair.

12/08/12 12:18:02 PM#42


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef Business model makes little difference to gamers. Poor design choices do. (GW2 and SWTOR)
I disagree. Sub forces a level of commitment, and prevent gamers from dabbling in a game. F2P obviously attract a lot more people to play test. So business model does change behaivor.  
The business model wasnt the problem with all these converted f2p games. Poor design choices were. Swtor had no endgame and the endgame it did have was unfinished, AOC buggy no endgame, aion grindy, WAR buggy, VG buggy as all hell, list goes on and on. IF SWtor was amazing you would see sub numbers near wow. The sub isnt going anywhere poor design choices are.
But the statement that "business model makes little difference" is clearly wrong. If by moving from p2p to f2p, player population increases 10x ...

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.


TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development

  Draron

Novice Member

Joined: 5/07/11
Posts: 1009

12/08/12 1:46:54 PM#43
Originally posted by Nitth

 


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef Business model makes little difference to gamers. Poor design choices do. (GW2 and SWTOR)
I disagree. Sub forces a level of commitment, and prevent gamers from dabbling in a game. F2P obviously attract a lot more people to play test. So business model does change behaivor.  
The business model wasnt the problem with all these converted f2p games. Poor design choices were. Swtor had no endgame and the endgame it did have was unfinished, AOC buggy no endgame, aion grindy, WAR buggy, VG buggy as all hell, list goes on and on. IF SWtor was amazing you would see sub numbers near wow. The sub isnt going anywhere poor design choices are.
But the statement that "business model makes little difference" is clearly wrong. If by moving from p2p to f2p, player population increases 10x ..

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.

Most F2P's population is stable, just the retention of players themselves are horrible. It's bad games that have bad population retention.

  madazz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/07/03
Posts: 1309

12/08/12 1:58:09 PM#44
This year I learned that a quantity of 8 or more is now considered to be a massive number.
  madazz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/07/03
Posts: 1309

12/08/12 2:02:18 PM#45
Originally posted by Draron
Originally posted by Nitth

 


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef Business model makes little difference to gamers. Poor design choices do. (GW2 and SWTOR)
I disagree. Sub forces a level of commitment, and prevent gamers from dabbling in a game. F2P obviously attract a lot more people to play test. So business model does change behaivor.  
The business model wasnt the problem with all these converted f2p games. Poor design choices were. Swtor had no endgame and the endgame it did have was unfinished, AOC buggy no endgame, aion grindy, WAR buggy, VG buggy as all hell, list goes on and on. IF SWtor was amazing you would see sub numbers near wow. The sub isnt going anywhere poor design choices are.
But the statement that "business model makes little difference" is clearly wrong. If by moving from p2p to f2p, player population increases 10x ..

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.

Most F2P's population is stable, just the retention of players themselves are horrible. It's bad games that have bad population retention.

While I agree with your perspective/opinion (individual player retention is terrible), I find most F2P games that I have tried suffer from the same thing as most modern copy/paste sub games. That being the game only has a stable population for a couple months at most. I can only think of 3-4 F2P games that have maintained a stable population for a longer period of time. I can however list off more SUB games that have a stable population. 

Besides, what good is having 10x the population only for the first 10-15 levels if none of them stick around and its always different people? 

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19849

12/08/12 2:05:30 PM#46
Originally posted by Nitth

 


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef Business model makes little difference to gamers. Poor design choices do. (GW2 and SWTOR)
I disagree. Sub forces a level of commitment, and prevent gamers from dabbling in a game. F2P obviously attract a lot more people to play test. So business model does change behaivor.  
The business model wasnt the problem with all these converted f2p games. Poor design choices were. Swtor had no endgame and the endgame it did have was unfinished, AOC buggy no endgame, aion grindy, WAR buggy, VG buggy as all hell, list goes on and on. IF SWtor was amazing you would see sub numbers near wow. The sub isnt going anywhere poor design choices are.
But the statement that "business model makes little difference" is clearly wrong. If by moving from p2p to f2p, player population increases 10x ...

 

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.

So? You still get plenty of people to play with. An unstable 10x population is still 10x.

  nariusseldon

Elite Member

Joined: 12/21/07
Posts: 19849

12/08/12 2:06:54 PM#47
Originally posted by madazz

Besides, what good is having 10x the population only for the first 10-15 levels if none of them stick around and its always different people? 

What good? You always have plenty to group with. In a pvp game, you always have enough targets.

Plus, no one says you cannot make friends and try to convince them to play longer with you. You have no one to play with if the pop is too small.

  Wayshuba

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 71

12/08/12 2:18:09 PM#48
Originally posted by nariusseldon
As far as the trend is concern:

http://www.newzoo.com/press-releases/free-to-play-mmo-game-spending-increases-24-to-1-2bn-dollar-in-u-s/

And i quote

"Free-to-play share of total U.S. MMO spending increases from 39% to 47%."

BTW, this is 2011 .. just last year.

This means little. Of course the trend is going to increase in F2P revenue when more companies are utilizing it as a business model and less are utilizing sub fees. That is all it means.

However, forcasts on the total revenue growth are rather low compared to the number of MMOs in the market.

  Cecropia

Gumshoe

Joined: 3/06/09
Posts: 3275

Poacher killer.

12/08/12 2:27:10 PM#49
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Nitth

 

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.

So? You still get plenty of people to play with. An unstable 10x population is still 10x.

We only ever hear about how amazing these "free" MMOs are doing after the initial switcheroo. Turbine actually just let go two high profile long time employess. You don't do that when you when you have "10x population".

These companies make a conscious decision to squeeze the sponge when these titles convert. I think it's understandable, but don't kid yourself into believing that all of these games are bustling with population numbers that are remotely close to where they were during their switcheroo re-launches.   

"Chuck's a good fighter but he's a UFC fighter... this is Pride." - Quinton Rampage Jackson
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb

  madazz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/07/03
Posts: 1309

12/08/12 2:27:32 PM#50
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by madazz

Besides, what good is having 10x the population only for the first 10-15 levels if none of them stick around and its always different people? 

What good? You always have plenty to group with. In a pvp game, you always have enough targets.

Plus, no one says you cannot make friends and try to convince them to play longer with you. You have no one to play with if the pop is too small.

Yeah... I am glad I stopped arguing with you. Your MMO experience is blatantly very limited. I do recall in another thread you stated you don't share the same opinion with the majority of MMO gamers who are looking for a game to stick with (for at least more than a month or 2). I recall you stated you are okay playing for a little bit then moving on to the next fun game. It is great that you share your opinion and all, but my opinion stems from wanting a game that is conducive to maintaining a community. Not a game where I have to try to convince people to stick around. So please, leave me alone, your responses do not apply to my argument. I have learned that regardless of what someone states, with you, you TRY to find a way to argue another point. Regardless of logic. I could go into greater details, but again, it is pointless with you. So please, go ahead and respond with your endless drivel of pure BS and trolling and realize that from this period on I will have you blocked. I am sure regardless you will try to skew yet another thread on to a path of arguing and weird ramblings that do not apply. 

I could pinpoint quite a few points out of the little you wrote that completely bashes your argument, but I know you will somehow come up with something that doesn't apply, effectively creating a strawman argument, or you will bring up a non-mmo and just de-rail this thread. Again, you are blocked on my end from here on out.

  Wayshuba

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/07/08
Posts: 71

12/08/12 2:34:05 PM#51
Originally posted by nariusseldon
 

So? You still get plenty of people to play with. An unstable 10x population is still 10x.

If a game has had 10x population increase (which I doubt) then it usually is attributed to two things:

1.) The population was so low already, that 10x still isn't really much.

2.) Turning on a number of accounts that were previously subs and left before the F2P transition (ala SWTOR).

 

There is little evidence that F2P is a viable long term, and heavily profitable, business models among a mature customer base. Furthermore, all evidence shows a brief increase after a F2P transition (because of the existing customer base at the time) followed by barely getting by afterwards.

 

You quoted DDO as an example. I can in fact tell you that neither DDO or LOTRO going to F2P have been smashing long term successes. Yes, a spike in the quarter after F2P, but that is about it. Since acquiring Turbine, the gaming division of Time-Warner has been progressiving losing more and more money every year (currently at -19% YoY). Doesn't sound like a money maker to me.

  dave6660

Hard Core Member

Joined: 9/26/08
Posts: 2344

"Next time I see you, remind me not to talk to you."

12/08/12 2:42:44 PM#52
Originally posted by madazz
This year I learned that a quantity of 8 or more is now considered to be a massive number.

What do you wanna bet that next year 5 or more will be massive.

"Why so serious?"
-- The Joker

  madazz

Apprentice Member

Joined: 10/07/03
Posts: 1309

12/08/12 2:55:15 PM#53
Originally posted by dave6660
Originally posted by madazz
This year I learned that a quantity of 8 or more is now considered to be a massive number.

What do you wanna bet that next year 5 or more will be massive.

I wouldn't take that bet because it's already happening!!

  xAPOCx

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/12
Posts: 891

12/08/12 4:08:54 PM#54
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by Nitth

 


Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by DSWBeef Business model makes little difference to gamers. Poor design choices do. (GW2 and SWTOR)
I disagree. Sub forces a level of commitment, and prevent gamers from dabbling in a game. F2P obviously attract a lot more people to play test. So business model does change behaivor.  
The business model wasnt the problem with all these converted f2p games. Poor design choices were. Swtor had no endgame and the endgame it did have was unfinished, AOC buggy no endgame, aion grindy, WAR buggy, VG buggy as all hell, list goes on and on. IF SWtor was amazing you would see sub numbers near wow. The sub isnt going anywhere poor design choices are.
But the statement that "business model makes little difference" is clearly wrong. If by moving from p2p to f2p, player population increases 10x ...

 

Does it really tho? f2p retention is horrible, as in the population numbers are unstable.

So? You still get plenty of people to play with. An unstable 10x population is still 10x.

This makes me lol. Your the sad individual nari.

  xAPOCx

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/12
Posts: 891

12/08/12 4:13:58 PM#55
Originally posted by madazz
Originally posted by nariusseldon
Originally posted by madazz

Besides, what good is having 10x the population only for the first 10-15 levels if none of them stick around and its always different people? 

What good? You always have plenty to group with. In a pvp game, you always have enough targets.

Plus, no one says you cannot make friends and try to convince them to play longer with you. You have no one to play with if the pop is too small.

Yeah... I am glad I stopped arguing with you. Your MMO experience is blatantly very limited. I do recall in another thread you stated you don't share the same opinion with the majority of MMO gamers who are looking for a game to stick with (for at least more than a month or 2). I recall you stated you are okay playing for a little bit then moving on to the next fun game. It is great that you share your opinion and all, but my opinion stems from wanting a game that is conducive to maintaining a community. Not a game where I have to try to convince people to stick around. So please, leave me alone, your responses do not apply to my argument. I have learned that regardless of what someone states, with you, you TRY to find a way to argue another point. Regardless of logic. I could go into greater details, but again, it is pointless with you. So please, go ahead and respond with your endless drivel of pure BS and trolling and realize that from this period on I will have you blocked. I am sure regardless you will try to skew yet another thread on to a path of arguing and weird ramblings that do not apply. 

I could pinpoint quite a few points out of the little you wrote that completely bashes your argument, but I know you will somehow come up with something that doesn't apply, effectively creating a strawman argument, or you will bring up a non-mmo and just de-rail this thread. Again, you are blocked on my end from here on out.

Right. He is the quintessential console gamer that floated into the realm of MMOs and now wants them to play just like his beloved console games. Theres no talking to this guy becuase he has his idea of what a MMO is and we have our ideas of what MMOs should be. IMO he has NO BUISNESS playing MMOs. Him and his ilk are the very ones that are killing this genre.

  xAPOCx

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/25/12
Posts: 891

12/08/12 4:20:15 PM#56
Originally posted by Wayshuba
Originally posted by nariusseldon
 

So? You still get plenty of people to play with. An unstable 10x population is still 10x.

If a game has had 10x population increase (which I doubt) then it usually is attributed to two things:

1.) The population was so low already, that 10x still isn't really much.

2.) Turning on a number of accounts that were previously subs and left before the F2P transition (ala SWTOR).

 

There is little evidence that F2P is a viable long term, and heavily profitable, business models among a mature customer base. Furthermore, all evidence shows a brief increase after a F2P transition (because of the existing customer base at the time) followed by barely getting by afterwards.

 

You quoted DDO as an example. I can in fact tell you that neither DDO or LOTRO going to F2P have been smashing long term successes. Yes, a spike in the quarter after F2P, but that is about it. Since acquiring Turbine, the gaming division of Time-Warner has been progressiving losing more and more money every year (currently at -19% YoY). Doesn't sound like a money maker to me.

I spoke on retention and it falls on def ears. i posted a link to the Turbin layoffs with no reply. People like nari infuriate me with they way they see MMOs as just another game on their PC to play.

 

All they care about are those quick game fixes that they can get in any other game. I dont know why they feel the need to turn MMos into there CO OP lobby based crap fest. I dont want to go as far as to block nari but just reading some of his assinine posts just pisses me off.

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search