Why FTP isn't the end of SW or PVP

[Astarica]

The numbers you're suggesting are silly, though. Do you really think that the ARPU would be a measly $1? Even if none of the F2Pers spent a dime, the $15 per sub would bring that number greater than $1 unless the number of F2Pers simply became massive.

 

On top of that, this is a very popular licensed product, which makes things a work a lot better once you have F2Pers coming in.

 

Look at Star Trek Online - an absolutely awful game, even in its currently improved state after they fixed it up a bit. There are constantly a bajillion people logged into that, and when I do log in I see people wearing the pay to own uniforms and whatnot everywhere. I also know just from the limited reading I've done on it that the game does well enough for itself - and remember: it's terrible. Still, it has the IP, and that does a ton for it. Now even the harshest critic of TOR has to admit that it's a thousand times the game - and that's an understatement - that STO is.

 

My point is that I'm quite certain there will be a lot of people who will end up spending a lot of money on this game.

 

Outside of WoW it's questionable whether any sub based game has even a million subscribers. Yet when you see these hybrid sub/F2P model that generally claims to have a user base greater than WoW (>10 million), we're supposed to believe that these hybrid games are also sitting on a huge number of subscribers even though it currently doesn't look like any game outside of WoW has 1 million subs?

 

F2Ps are dominated by the guys who pay absolutely nothing. If a game claims to have >10 million users (common amongst F2Ps), you must have at least 90% guys who aren't subs since it's hard to imagine any F2P having 1 milion subscribers. Any game with 1 million subscribers also wouldn't be shy about releasing concrete revenue data since that'll get you new investors.

 

F2P is often viewed as a sign of a game surrendering and in this case, the majority is right. If F2P is such a great idea we'd see more games that start as F2P (SWTOR sure isn't one of them), and more importantly we'd see F2P release data that doesn't require an accountent to decipher. Anyone can read Blizzard's finanical statement, find the "MMORPG" column, and figure out that WoW makes a ton of money. When talking about F2Ps, especially games that got converted F2Ps, you've to deal with metrics that nobody has ever heard of before.

 

Now I heard some games like World of Tanks actually do release financial data but games like that are built on the ground up to be F2P and that's not quite the same as a game that started out as sub and can't cut it. They've characteristics like cash shop for consumable ammos that cannot be easily worked into a game like SWTOR without overhauling the whole system.

[UGLYMRJ]

Its what i got out of them saying "In game Transactions" instead of subscriptions from the article. Maybe i am reading too much between the lines but i am basing it on my experience with other games i have played that have gone from subscription to FTP.

 

You purchase "coins" with cash to buy ingame stuff. they do this so its not easy to trade/sell to other players so you don't have to deal with possible tax issues (which blizzard did with diablo 3).

 

Read my post above.. you may, unfortunately be right after all. There was a sentence in there I must have blew by taht does suggest exactly what you're saying. Not entirely clear but it does say that the coins may be purchased through various price packs or something like that.

 

Almost wish I didn't read that.... I really hope they don't sink this ship. Hoping they keep it very limited, just novelty items like gear with no mods, pets and mounts.

 

Anything more than that will NOT be good fo this game.

Edited August 1, 2012 by UGLYMRJ

[SgtBranham]

Actually... after looking it over again... I stand corrected. There is a sentence in there that does suggest that they may be able to be purchased with cash.

 

I pray they keep it very limited if that's true. I'm surprised they would even toy with the idea after watchign D3 fall apart.

 

I'm just a little depressed now... on the bright side tho.

 

Planetside 2 beta starts next week.

 

I am just glad we were able to discuss this without resorting to insulting each other mothers. It will be a different beast than diablo 3. They will control prices with no player to player cash transactions. Again, if its like other games, they will keep it to where you can purchase in game items that exist somewhere else in game (ie no powerful items that are exclusive to by with cash). High end raid and pvp gear will not be able to be purchased and there will be alot of convience items (transport, xp bonuses etc.). They may do datacrons so you don't have to farm them but i suspect this will be the highest power level item they sell.

[UGLYMRJ]

I am just glad we were able to discuss this without resorting to insulting each other mothers. It will be a different beast than diablo 3. They will control prices with no player to player cash transactions. Again, if its like other games, they will keep it to where you can purchase in game items that exist somewhere else in game (ie no powerful items that are exclusive to by with cash). High end raid and pvp gear will not be able to be purchased and there will be alot of convience items (transport, xp bonuses etc.). They may do datacrons so you don't have to farm them but i suspect this will be the highest power level item they sell.

 

I hope you're right... very limited is going to be the key to making this work at all.

 

And seriously... a civilized conversation on these forums is a rare event.

 

And I'm sure your mother is a very nice lady.

[SgtBranham]

I hope you're right... very limited is going to be the key to making this work at all.

 

And seriously... a civilized conversation on these forums is a rare event.

 

And I'm sure your mother is a very nice lady.

 

WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT MY MOTHER!?!?!? RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

 

But seriously, This can be a good thing if they do it right and it will add a lot of new players to the game and help them generate the money to keep the game going strong.

[Astarica]

Limited cash shop is what exactly dooms a game converted to F2P. If you go F2P you need to go all the way, like selling 'WZ uberness stim' that gives +30% expertise for the duration of the next WZ match for $1. People will complain about how this is totally destroying the balance of the game and then you'd see those '2XXX rated team' posters go buy 200 of them while posting about how they'll quit because the cash shop has ruined the game.

 

But of course this is almost certainly not going to happen, so you'll end up with cash shop like "$5 for 5% more XP for next 30 minutes" or "$25 for another speeder that looks like any other speeder" and nobody is going to buy that, so balance is still observed because nobody's going to be dumb enough to buy these things. I'm pretty sure all the super successful F2Ps have an equivalent of 'cash shop ammo', i.e. without this ammo you can't possibly be competitive and since it's ammo, you use it up and have to buy new ones constantly. Sure you can say that's like selling out your soul for money, but that's what you got to do if you want to make money. The mistake I see with F2Ps is that the game developers assume they're somehow going to make money without actually selling their soul.

[Skolops]

Actually... after looking it over again... I stand corrected. There is a sentence in there that does suggest that they may be able to be purchased with cash.

 

I pray they keep it very limited if that's true. I'm surprised they would even toy with the idea after watchign D3 fall apart.

 

I'm just a little depressed now... on the bright side tho.

 

Planetside 2 beta starts next week.

 

D3 didn't fall apart because it had a cash shop.

 

D3 fell apart because it WAS a cash shop.

 

It is a game with very, very little replay value which has as a central feature a cash shop designed to enable you to purchase items to use while replaying the game. Hence, it failed.

 

SWtOR - and even GW2 or heck ANY other MMO for that matter - has vastly, vastly superior replay value than D3 did. Moreover, it is the community/"second life" aspect of MMOs which makes them fun, when it comes down to it, and so having a shop to sell things like pets or clothes for your characters is naturally going to draw more interest.

 

Don't be depressed because of D3's fate - it's not nearly the same thing.

[DarthOvertone]

Do you need a quote if I said the earth is round? It's very easy to infer this.

 

Well...when you make up numbers it's easy to infer anything.

 

Despite all the talk about how this is the next generation, no F2P I know of dares to put a number that's 1/10th as much as what WoW openly puts on their finanical statement.

 

WoW is a horrible example. It's not even an F2P game, and as a sub game, is an anomaly. No publisher would dare to put up a number 1/10th of WoW that is sub or F2P based, simply because WoW is in a league all its own. I don't even understand what point you are trying to make in this regard. Because F2P games don't make as much money as WoW, they don't make money?

 

That certainly isn't the case. Not only do games operate in the black based on F2P and make a profit, but F2P has rescued many games from death (DDO & LOTRO for instance).

 

 

I'm about to give up... the way I read things. Those items ARE earned with coins... coins earned from paying for a SUBSCRIPTION! NOT something you can buy alone.

 

Cartel Coins (CC) will be a new currency in game used to purchase items from the shop. You will not use cash to buy shop items. You will use the new currency. Subscribers will receive a small allottment of CC to buy things with. Non-Subscribers (F2Pers) will have to pay cash for CC. If Subscribers want to purchase items from the shop beyond the CC they are given, then they will have to purchase additional CC with cash.

 

How many F2P games still have a subscription base or even offer one?

 

Many F2P games offer a subscription in addition to being F2P. This type of hybrid model is quite popular, even if the emphasis is more on F2P than on subs. LOTRO is a good example of this.

[Skolops]

Outside of WoW it's questionable whether any sub based game has even a million subscribers. Yet when you see these hybrid sub/F2P model that generally claims to have a user base greater than WoW (>10 million), we're supposed to believe that these hybrid games are also sitting on a huge number of subscribers even though it currently doesn't look like any game outside of WoW has 1 million subs?

 

F2Ps are dominated by the guys who pay absolutely nothing. If a game claims to have >10 million users (common amongst F2Ps), you must have at least 90% guys who aren't subs since it's hard to imagine any F2P having 1 milion subscribers. Any game with 1 million subscribers also wouldn't be shy about releasing concrete revenue data since that'll get you new investors.

 

F2P is often viewed as a sign of a game surrendering and in this case, the majority is right. If F2P is such a great idea we'd see more games that start as F2P (SWTOR sure isn't one of them), and more importantly we'd see F2P release data that doesn't require an accountent to decipher. Anyone can read Blizzard's finanical statement, find the "MMORPG" column, and figure out that WoW makes a ton of money. When talking about F2Ps, especially games that got converted F2Ps, you've to deal with metrics that nobody has ever heard of before.

 

Now I heard some games like World of Tanks actually do release financial data but games like that are built on the ground up to be F2P and that's not quite the same as a game that started out as sub and can't cut it. They've characteristics like cash shop for consumable ammos that cannot be easily worked into a game like SWTOR without overhauling the whole system.

 

Look, I'm not saying that this F2P option in TOR isn't an... unplanned turn of events. I'm sure they intended to run on purely a sub model for quite a long time, and this is to a degree (I'd say somewhat of a small one) a surrender to less than intended performance.

 

That said, I also think that F2P is much less of what you're describing as it used to be. I've seen a fair bit of talk recently that the entire industry will likely be moving into F2P as time goes on from this point for a variety of reasons, and GW2 is actually a prime example of that. They're starting off as purely and entirely F2P, but that doesn't mean they are already surrendering. They happen to think its the best business model for their game, either for the immediate now or the proximate future.

[kcol]

Again... there is not talk of a cash market and you are basing this on claims made by the population that likes to assume and complain. THERE IS NO CASH MARKET COMING WITH F2P. It has not been announced or hinted at. Does anyone really think they are that stupid after what it did to D3?

 

The way it's set up is play for free with very limited access or you can pay for PvE content alone or PvP content alone. Or as we all do now pay for the full sub to have access to all content. There is no pay for gear or items coming to this game with the F2P option. This is just another rumor flying around by a bunch of people looking for something else to complain about on forums.

 

IT IS EA.....CASH MARKET IS TO BE EXPECTED. Maybe not now, but wouldn't put it past them in the near future.

[Astarica]

Well...when you make up numbers it's easy to infer anything.

 

 

 

WoW is a horrible example. It's not even an F2P game, and as a sub game, is an anomaly. No publisher would dare to put up a number 1/10th of WoW that is sub or F2P based, simply because WoW is in a league all its own. I don't even understand what point you are trying to make in this regard. Because F2P games don't make as much money as WoW, they don't make money?

 

That certainly isn't the case. Not only do games operate in the black based on F2P and make a profit, but F2P has rescued many games from death (DDO & LOTRO for instance).

 

 

.

 

The only thing you've in support of F2P is that it saved same games that otherwise would've shut down. That is the definition of success? Vanguard is running on one server on a sub based model for a while before going F2P, so comparing to games like that isn't a recipe of success.

 

I'm not sure why you keep on think WoW inherently is some game that no F2P has a chance to catch especially since you buy the F2P awesomeness whole sale. WoW has around 10 millino subs. The ARUP is somewhere around $15 (the sub fee). This produces numbers on the order of $1 billion/year on the financial statement that anyone can confirm. This number may or may not be true but that's the numbers we're looking at the top of the food chain.

 

It is common for any F2P to claim an absolutely crazy number of users. WoW's concurrent peak user is around 2 million from the fan sites that try to study these things and there are 2 F2Ps in China that exceed just from China alone (since nobody has ever heard of these games outside of China). Again while everyone can lie this suggests F2Ps are certainly comfortable claiming to have 10 million users. For example a random search on google reveals FreeRealms has 20 million registered users:

 

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2011/10/21/sony-online%E2%80%99s-free-realms-boasts-20m-registered-users/

 

And FreeRealms is hardly the biggest F2P out there. Sure registered user isn't the same as active users but good luck finding these numbers for any game besides WoW since this stuff is viewed as industry secrets. All I can say is that F2P doesn't shy away from tossing large number of millions of users when talking about their game.

 

So if you use '10 million users", an ARUP of $1/month is $120 million per year, and according to you it's clear ARUP is way higher than $1. Then where are the press releases of F2P generating $100 millino an year? Certainly that's a number anybody can be proud of to announce. It's true the number of active users in a F2P is probably considerably less than 10 million (or every F2P would need server infrastructure like WoW to support it) but this stuff is industry secret so I can't possibly know what it is. All I can say is that if all these large X millions of users they throw around is true, it implies ARUP must be abysmal. If ARUP is not abysmal, then they must have much less users then the numbers they like to throw around. The truth is probably somewhere in between but the truth is not definitely not the company line.

[Astarica]

Look, I'm not saying that this F2P option in TOR isn't an... unplanned turn of events. I'm sure they intended to run on purely a sub model for quite a long time, and this is to a degree (I'd say somewhat of a small one) a surrender to less than intended performance.

 

That said, I also think that F2P is much less of what you're describing as it used to be. I've seen a fair bit of talk recently that the entire industry will likely be moving into F2P as time goes on from this point for a variety of reasons, and GW2 is actually a prime example of that. They're starting off as purely and entirely F2P, but that doesn't mean they are already surrendering. They happen to think its the best business model for their game, either for the immediate now or the proximate future.

 

There's a huge difference between a game built to be F2P from ground up (GW2) versus one that had to become one due to unexpected turn of events. F2P is viable if you start the game to cater to F2P's strength. So far all the sub to F2P story basically define success as "We were going to shut down before F2P, but now we don't have to". If you look at a successful F2P game like the Korean FPS that somehow dethroned WoW in Korea they have characteristics that you can't just force into an existing sub game unless you're tearing the whole game apart. Cash shop ammo, for example, is not something that can be done in SWTOR without completely tearing the game design apart.

 

I mean companies have to do whatever they do to stay alive so I don't begrudge that, but I don't buy this 'this is going to make our game way better than before'. No you obviously screwed up and maybe it'll salvage it but F2P certainly wasn't plan A.

[Skolops]

The only thing you've in support of F2P is that it saved same games that otherwise would've shut down. That is the definition of success? Vanguard is running on one server on a sub based model for a while before going F2P, so comparing to games like that isn't a recipe of success.

 

I'm not sure why you keep on think WoW inherently is some game that no F2P has a chance to catch especially since you buy the F2P awesomeness whole sale. WoW has around 10 millino subs. The ARUP is somewhere around $15 (the sub fee). This produces numbers on the order of $1 billion/year on the financial statement that anyone can confirm. This number may or may not be true but that's the numbers we're looking at the top of the food chain.

 

It is common for any F2P to claim an absolutely crazy number of users. WoW's concurrent peak user is around 2 million from the fan sites that try to study these things and there are 2 F2Ps in China that exceed just from China alone (since nobody has ever heard of these games outside of China). Again while everyone can lie this suggests F2Ps are certainly comfortable claiming to have 10 million users. For example a random search on google reveals FreeRealms has 20 million registered users:

 

http://siliconangle.com/blog/2011/10/21/sony-online%E2%80%99s-free-realms-boasts-20m-registered-users/

 

And FreeRealms is hardly the biggest F2P out there. Sure registered user isn't the same as active users but good luck finding these numbers for any game besides WoW since this stuff is viewed as industry secrets. All I can say is that F2P doesn't shy away from tossing large number of millions of users when talking about their game.

 

So if you use '10 million users", an ARUP of $1/month is $120 million per year, and according to you it's clear ARUP is way higher than $1. Then where are the press releases of F2P generating $100 millino an year? Certainly that's a number anybody can be proud of to announce. It's true the number of active users in a F2P is probably considerably less than 10 million (or every F2P would need server infrastructure like WoW to support it) but this stuff is industry secret so I can't possibly know what it is. All I can say is that if all these large X millions of users they throw around is true, it implies ARUP must be abysmal. If ARUP is not abysmal, then they must have much less users then the numbers they like to throw around. The truth is probably somewhere in between but the truth is not definitely not the company line.

 

Why is it that in all of your posts you're citing these random F2P games that half of people have have never heard of, but you don't mention some of the more well known ones?

 

It also occurs to me that you're talking a lot about total revenue, but far less about profit margins, which is really the name of the game: what am I putting in, and what am I getting out?

Edited August 1, 2012 by Skolops

[kcol]

This whole MMO movement towards micro transactions will be the death of the genere. I don't play online facebook games for the simple reason that they try to nickle and dime you to death for content that you should be able to play. If this is the trend and future of MMO's, I think I'll just go back to my Nintendo 64 and play a game I paid for and that I'm allowed to see all the content from the purchase price of said game.

[vwsupra]

I think GW2 will be very popular at first, but have a very hard time retaining people after the first few months. Already one of the biggest complaints you're hearing from beta testers is that there just isn't much content after a certain point, and that the system they've implemented to provide content (basically an inverse bolster system) is somewhat of a copout and very much boring. As for the PvP, whether people realize it or not I think they will very much get bored quite fast without a gear progression to go after. Not looking to start anything in this thread, so lets just leave it at we'll have to wait and see.

 

gw2 beta testers complaining about "not enough" content, is like a swtor "weekend pass player" complaining about "not enough" content. lawl Skolops dont talk about things you know nothing about, you can only play to level 20 in the beta and the level cap is 80. The gw2 beta lets you play less then 20% of the game content.

Edited August 1, 2012 by vwsupra

[Akatoshia]

Actually... after looking it over again... I stand corrected. There is a sentence in there that does suggest that they may be able to be purchased with cash.

 

I pray they keep it very limited if that's true. I'm surprised they would even toy with the idea after watchign D3 fall apart.

 

I'm just a little depressed now... on the bright side tho.

 

Planetside 2 beta starts next week.

 

If you look at 99% of the F2P MMOs on the market, you will see this kind of system. Star Trek Online, Lotro, AoC, DDO... the list goes on. This is the entire point of the Cartel Market, to allow customers to buy these coins for REAL MONEY, and spend them on in game assets and content, a la carte. That is the objective goal of this breed of F2P.

 

D3 sold well over 6 million copies, and continues to make Blizzard richer with the commissions they make off of the auction house. D3 certainly hasn't fallen apart. It's fared MUCH better than this MMO.

 

Selling fluff alone won't net BW the numbers they seek to get this game off of the ground, mark my words. I played Lotro for 4 years, and finally quit last summer. I couldn't take it after they ruined the game with F2P.

 

They will ease in the Pay-to-win stuff in at first... but it will only get worse from there. If swtor follows this pattern, I would expect to see:

 

-No CD health/resource stims that can be used along with the regular ones

-The devs will remove the ability to rip our mods/enhancements without a special item from the store

-Removed rank on PvP gear, will be sold in the store for any character

-Sell +100 stat items that have 3 or 4 tiers. Only really available in store, even though they lie and say they drop in game(1 in several thousand drop chance)

 

I would also expect all of the legacy buffs to be somehow tied into the cartel market. It will make BW a TON of money. But expect the content cycles to lengthen because no new content will be needed to milk F2Pers in the future.

 

/end rant

[Astarica]

Why is it that in all of your posts you're citing these random F2P games that half of people have have never heard of, but you don't mention some of the more well known ones?

 

It also occurs to me that you're talking a lot about total revenue, but far less about profit margins, which is really the name of the game: what am I putting in, and what am I getting out?

 

What well known F2Ps? LOTRO? DDO? Are you sure you're not talking about games that are known to have avoided extinction by going to F2P? That's not exactly a measurement of success. When it comes to F2P, the western world is way behind anyway so the most successful F2Ps are indeed games you've never heard of before. Some Korean F2P actually dethroned WoW in Korea and that's pretty much unthinkable. Again they could've lied but the point is no western F2P would even dare to compare themselves to WoW in anyway, so unless these Koreans are just incredibly brave that means they got to have something to back it up, and I believe they do have the revenue numbers to back up the claim that they beat WoW in Korea.

 

I limit my discussion to revenue because revenue is much harder to hide than profit. There are a ton of accounting tricks that can make you more or less profit depending on what you're trying to show. It's quite a bit harder to hide the revenue though.

[Monterone]

I've quit every game that's gone from paid sub to F2P -- just saying; games I mostly had 6 month recurring subs on.

 

I expect if I'm a paying customer at the time this goes F2P, I'll do the same.

[Astarica]

If you look at 99% of the F2P MMOs on the market, you will see this kind of system. Star Trek Online, Lotro, AoC, DDO... the list goes on. This is the entire point of the Cartel Market, to allow customers to buy these coins for REAL MONEY, and spend them on in game assets and content, a la carte. That is the objective goal of this breed of F2P.

 

D3 sold well over 6 million copies, and continues to make Blizzard richer with the commissions they make off of the auction house. D3 certainly hasn't fallen apart. It's fared MUCH better than this MMO.

 

Selling fluff alone won't net BW the numbers they seek to get this game off of the ground, mark my words. I played Lotro for 4 years, and finally quit last summer. I couldn't take it after they ruined the game with F2P.

 

They will ease in the Pay-to-win stuff in at first... but it will only get worse from there. If swtor follows this pattern, I would expect to see:

 

-No CD health/resource stims that can be used along with the regular ones

-The devs will remove the ability to rip our mods/enhancements without a special item from the store

-Removed rank on PvP gear, will be sold in the store for any character

-Sell +100 stat items that have 3 or 4 tiers. Only really available in store, even though they lie and say they drop in game(1 in several thousand drop chance)

 

I would also expect all of the legacy buffs to be somehow tied into the cartel market. It will make BW a TON of money. But expect the content cycles to lengthen because no new content will be needed to milk F2Pers in the future.

 

/end rant

 

Selling a ton of copies doesn't make Diablo 3 a success, especially since you're dealing with a huge brand name here. If Blizzard liquidated all its assets tomorrow then Diablo 3 would a huge success, but they're in the long run and at this point it's unclear if the money they made off Diablo 3 is worth the long term damage.

 

I'd argue cash shops fail because they're not P2W enough. I always see cash shop thinking they can get away with this slippery slope thing, but the players aren't as dumb as they think. Usually slippery slope really just means 'offer a bunch of bad deals and eventually ease into slightly better deals' which makes even the guys who are willing to P2W feel like he's wasting his money. If you just flat out and say '30% expertise in one WZ stims for $1' there are some people who will say 'where can I get 200 more of those?' The 'P2W sucks' guy will likely quit even if you're selling '5% more commendations for an hour for $5' even though that's really a terrible deal to buy so you might as well go all the way. If your ultimate goal is to extract as much money as possible you might as well go all the way and see what people will take, because people aren't as stupid as devs think they are.

Edited August 1, 2012 by Astarica

[feuer]

With the way they are setting up F2P, I really dont see it being an issue. More players means faster queues and just more people leveling in general. I dont see this being an issue. I will keep paying my $15 and have everything I could want along with more people to play with.,

 

i wouldnt be sure about shorter queues, since f2p-players wont have real access to fps and wzs. maybe for once or twice a day they can join i guess.

 

or they can join if some p2p-players need mates.

Edited August 1, 2012 by feuer

[Pistols]

You either enjoy the game enough to play, or you don't, doesn't matter whether $15 or F2P.

 

/mind_blown

[Ghostuka]

You either enjoy the game enough to play, or you don't, doesn't matter whether $15 or F2P.

 

/mind_blown

[TonyDragonflame]

This game anyway very good, because there is nice community of SW fans

[DarthOvertone]

The only thing you've in support of F2P is that it saved same games that otherwise would've shut down. That is the definition of success?

 

No. The definition of success is that it enables game companies to operate in the black and actually make a profit after their venture capital or initial investment runs out. It has the additional boon of having rescued some games that wouldn't exist today otherwise.

 

I support F2P because it's good for consumers. It gives us choices in how to engage the game. The subscription model is outmoded at this point and far too rigid. People need more flexibility in this day and age. F2P can work, but there is a slippery slope involved in its implementation that can ruin gameplay.

 

Companies like F2P because it makes them money. If it didn't make them money, you wouldn't see pretty much every MMO gaming title adopting it in some way, shape or form across the board. Even your beloved WoW has embraced it somewhat.

 

I'd argue cash shops fail because they're not P2W enough.

 

You are 100% right about this.

 

 

Selling fluff alone won't net BW the numbers they seek to get this game off of the ground, mark my words. I played Lotro for 4 years, and finally quit last summer. I couldn't take it after they ruined the game with F2P.

 

They will ease in the Pay-to-win stuff in at first... but it will only get worse from there. If swtor follows this pattern, I would expect to see:

 

-No CD health/resource stims that can be used along with the regular ones

-The devs will remove the ability to rip our mods/enhancements without a special item from the store

-Removed rank on PvP gear, will be sold in the store for any character

-Sell +100 stat items that have 3 or 4 tiers. Only really available in store, even though they lie and say they drop in game(1 in several thousand drop chance)

 

Unfortunately, you are 100% correct. It's a slippery slope to be sure. It starts out with the convenience, not advantage tripe, and then slowly evolves into Pay2Win. And this is not because EA/BW is evil. Far from it. It's because the players will pay for advantage, not convenience. If there was no demand for P2W type stuff, the publisher wouldn't sell it in the shop.

 

Maybe this won't happen with SWTOR. But d*mn you for giving them some good ideas. lol

Edited August 1, 2012 by DarthOvertone

[Iggster]

Coming in 1.5!

 

The brand new improved illum! Take the fight to your enemies with 5 new dailies and 4 newly located control nodes and 11(!) new spawn locations to stop the mass ganking due to faction imbalance!

 

All this coming on November 24th for a mere 4000 cartel coins.

 

And boost your warzone experience with new consumables coming to the cartel store.

 

Bottled force - your resolve bar will always be full for 20 minutes - 500CC

Wookies fury - increase your damage to other players by 90% (lasts 4 hours) - 1000CC

Sigil of the lost warlord - adds health regeneration in combat (10% health every 5 seconds) - 1000CC

 

This might be a Slight exaggeration on the future of the pvp in star wars, but I've never liked the idea of cash shops in games that have competitive multiplayer in them. I remember LOTRO telling me I had to buy the ability to PVP.