LogunOne Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 The fact that this game cannot stand up to WoW, with all its money and the reputable developer using the subscription model is pretty much proof that no other mmo will be able to. WoW has simply gotten too big. F2P is pretty fail for an mmo imo, especially one this young but it looks like BW have to take some desperate measures to keep this game going. The reality is most people won't pay a sub for WoW 0.5 so they have to appeal to potential mmo customers by other means. No, it can’t stand up to WoW by copying WoW ‘s mindless leveling followed by endgame gear grind …WoW’s got that format locked-up and you’re not going to dislodge those players. The miss here is going after WoW’s market, it’s the same miss just about every MMO since WoW has made. LOL….they even copied WoW’s mistakes, and tacking on a Bioware like story isn’t enough to disguise this. I do agree the F2P model will not work for this game it will become a free Bioware game not a F2P MMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
testszag Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 in each of the games that i have played that went to the f2p hybrid model, the quality of updates to cosmetic items given to the paying customer dropped considerably. intstead of cool new weapons and outfits every couple of months, we got mediocre reskins. we could buy the new cooler things from the store, but that means they got our sub as well as anything we may buy. to try and mask this, they give us these coins they are gonna use for anythng in the store, but you can't get anything of value from the amount that is given. if they give us 500 a month, the new costume packs will cost 999 or 1000, or even 1500. you could wait and save oyur coins until you have enough, but by then they will have a new set out.this does not touch on the pay to win that inevitably rears its ugly head in the form of xp upgrades or power boosts. or even buying the most powerful gear and weapons. what really scares me is this: "While we are well above that today, that is not good enough," Mr. Gibeau said. "The message from players exiting the game is clear. Forty percent say they were turned off by the monthly subscription, and many indicate they would come back if we offered a free-to-play model." from: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120731-722093.html seriously? they are trying to tell us that %40 of the people who bought this game, knowing it was a pay to play model, left because they had to pay? what a load. what they said was, with the game in this bad of condition (not that i agree), they would expect it to be free to play. if it had met their expectaions (which may have been too high), they would have happily continued paying. it is not the same thing that they believe that this is the problem leads me to think they are not going to be giving the real problems a serious look. while i like playing, this is not something i am willing to do. once my sub is up, i won't be back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallorik Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 What about GW2? A game that hasnt released yet makes industry standards? How about gw1? now theres a game that deserved to be f2p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkZeron Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 It is really against their philosophy. They never looked to maintain a sub based game. It always has been and it has been proven that the F2P model can be more profitable than the P2P one. Also again, look at how they have approached making their game. http://www.arena.net/blog/is-it-fun-colin-johanson-on-how-arenanet-measures-success They are not doing it because they can't, it is because they don't want to. Maintaining a P2P model is more risky though, you do have to release a lot more content quicker in order to have players feel like their money is going towards something. Pretty much nowadays you have to release content every month in order to make players feel justified in their subs. DCUO tried this (and failed) and SWTOR claimed that they could do this (and failed) TSW plans on having updates every month and I'm willing to bet it just really can't be done. As i said they know they cannot do a P2P model (noone can nowadays) they may not even want to so they went with the model they went. Nothing wrong with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallorik Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 That's all well and good in a full f2p game, but the majority of this games revenue will still come from subscribers. They will have to keep churning out content as well as building the cash shop. Don't be so narrow minded. Like lotro and DDO? sorry but those two games release as much content in 3 years as wow or rift does in 6 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldrenath Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I love how all MMO players claim all f2p games are fail. F2p is where all MMOs are going. Heck, they're nearly all already there. Is there a SINGLE released subscriber-based AAA MMO that many or most gamers consider a success? All MMO players think that ALL MMOs except WoW are fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mallorik Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 MMOs like Planetside and GW2 will start as F2P games, and games that have moved to F2P actually turned their fortune around. Players begin to realize that you are ever actually just paying for what you want in the game. If playing operations is say $5 a month and that is all you do then you are actually saving money on the game. Just a example, I don't know how they are going to do this. In GW2 case, you are only paying for expansions IF you want to play that content. The people that have played WoW since the start have spent over $1000 in monthly fees, not including the EPs. Guild Wars one players have saved a lot more money. If you don't want the cool shades, don't buy them. Planetside 2 is not an mmo, its a shooter which have traditionaly been b2p anyways. Gw1 players have saved a ton of money because they were playing a game with horrible pve and very few content updates. I wouldnt call that saving, its more like buying a pinto instead of a mustang and bragging about how much money you saved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash-X Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) A game that hasnt released yet makes industry standards? How about gw1? now theres a game that deserved to be f2p. DAoC EVE Final Fantasy WoW Rift There is your list of P2P games. Did I miss any? Some of the Pay to play games are old like Everquest though...so you can go play that if you like. Planetside 2 is not an mmo, its a shooter which have traditionaly been b2p anyways. Gw1 players have saved a ton of money because they were playing a game with horrible pve and very few content updates. I wouldnt call that saving, its more like buying a pinto instead of a mustang and bragging about how much money you saved. Yes it is a MMO. Massively Multiplayer Online game. These games have reached outside the boundaries of just RPGs and now there are MMOFPS and MMORTS games...they are still MMO games. EDIT: Also it's your opinion on the original GW (one of the best selling PC series) it seemed enough people thought paying $15 for SWTOR wasn't worth it. Edited July 31, 2012 by Crash-X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts