Yoshi-P talks swtor and why Final Fantasy XIV will be sub only.

[gorstram]

I don't agree with this entirely with respect to the reason folks left SWTOR.

 

I think part of it had to do with the market, part the lack of content for end game, and part because the game focused on the wrong group of players. Instead of focusing on casual games, the SWG, KotOR and Star Wars fans as much as they should have (I say 100 percent) they focused many game elements on the "WoW" type hardcore player. Then they were surprised when that professional type player burned through the content as quickly as they did.

 

The game did not appeal enough to casual players. This was the biggest design mistake IMO. You either cater to an audience that is going to value your story and single player friendly design or you focus ALL design elements to cater to a professional crowd and make sure content is stacked to present shortly after launch.

 

They should have had a full expansion with three new planets, 5 new flashpoints, 4 new operations, 3 new battlegrounds and open world ranked PVP, and a continuation of the personal storylines all the way up to level 65, in three parts in place before launch. Or they should have just launched F2P with the market in place.

 

Had they focused on casual players, they would have had all armor as unlockable to adaptive armor, dyes or some type of appearance system in place, a BF2 style space battleground combined with the current space mission feature that included multiplayer and turret play, less instancing/more open world, starships as housing with a robust decoration mechanic in place, less voiced side quests, no companion requirement to play the solo game, huge bonuses for group play, chat bubbles, sit and sleep emotes, more minigames and hands on crafting, etc.

 

Out of all of the posts in this thread, this post rings best with me. People were saying shortly after launch, "This game is still in its infancy, look how long WoW took to develop those features, give it time." That's a poor argument considering those features have been established for quite some time in other games, and the devs were clearly going for the standard hotbar MMO with this game. They should have copied those features into the game AT DAY 1! People coming from WoW because of the IP saw the similarities but felt the short comings immensely. My original guild in this game was full of WoW converts from our progression raiding guild. They dropped after the first three months because they felt that SWTOR wanted to be a Star Wars based WoW-type MMO, but failed to deliver WoW's quality of life features.

 

Additionally, one needs to also keep in mind that MMO players are some of the most severely fickle players in the gaming market. Any game developer needs to remember to grab that player's attention and then work their asses off blowing that player's mind until the budget is spent. EA dumped a ton of cash up front, but when the time came to keep that cash flowing to retain their players, it just petered out. WoW doesn't face this kind of issue because it is Blizzard's crown jewel.

 

I'm happy to keep playing this game, but my excitement for it is pretty nominal. I play it because there are no other decent sci-fi MMO's out there right now. I may leave if one comes out. I just hope that at some point, EA starts to care again, and give BW the cash it needs to continually develop this IP.

[Solzean]

 

FFXIV goes live (again) next week. The community will know in a matter of months if Yoshi has to fall on his sword over this one.

 

I'll bet it will fall pretty flat and thus he will fall on the sword. While it was a fun game it didnt seem to have any new features that will really draw players in and keep them. Grant it, i suppose the idea of being any class anytime MIGHT work but i also think that is a bad plan in terms of keeping players interested.

 

I still think that Free to Play is a bit more of an advantage than people give it credit for. I cant tell you how many times ive stopped paying then logged onto a character...just one last time...and then I am subbed again the next day. With Pay to play, I just assume my character is dead and I tend to forget all of the things that made me love that game. Just my own opinion.

[DorkTrooper]

I know I liked SWTOR more as a sub-only game. Not saying that I haven't enjoyed some of the changes made since the change to F2P, but I could totally do without the Cartel Market and the nickel-and-diming approach to item access, even if that meant fewer new vanity items on a regular basis. Apparently, the majority of the MMO market does not see things that way. *shrug*

 

The SW setting and quest-heavy theme drew me here, and I'm content for now. If I ever join another MMO, it will have at least a sub option, if not be sub-only. No interest at all in Final Fantasy, though.

[Kilora]

I'll bet it will fall pretty flat and thus he will fall on the sword. While it was a fun game it didnt seem to have any new features that will really draw players in and keep them. Grant it, i suppose the idea of being any class anytime MIGHT work but i also think that is a bad plan in terms of keeping players interested.

 

I still think that Free to Play is a bit more of an advantage than people give it credit for. I cant tell you how many times ive stopped paying then logged onto a character...just one last time...and then I am subbed again the next day. With Pay to play, I just assume my character is dead and I tend to forget all of the things that made me love that game. Just my own opinion.

 

I don't think FFXIV is really focusing on bringing in new players -- I think they're riding off of the FF brand. And that is why I think they'll survive.

 

I don't think it'll be some monumental success -- but it definitely has an installed playerbase that will stick around for the nostalgia, so long as they keep pumping out content and keep it polished.

 

Reminds me of SWTOR. How many people stay with this game because it is Star Wars? How many because it is F2P, or because they have a community they play with and love?

[Hockaday]

LOL what are you talking about?

 

If you're going to make stuff up, at least get creative. The ONLY problems apparent in the Phase 4 FFXIV:ARR beta were 2 errors -- both of which were directly related to the fact that the P4 beta was a server stress test.

 

Google it. It has been going on for a year or more. Constant errors. Stops and restarts. It has a horrible patcher. If they can't even get the installer to work, I doubt they can make a game that will satisfy anyone.

 

Oh, and telling a person that in order to maybe get it work, they have to disable their firewall, antivirus, and shut every single program off...that is not a solution.

[Kilora]

Google it. It has been going on for a year or more. Constant errors. Stops and restarts. It has a horrible patcher. If they can't even get the installer to work, I doubt they can make a game that will satisfy anyone.

 

Oh, and telling a person that in order to maybe get it work, they have to disable their firewall, antivirus, and shut every single program off...that is not a solution.

 

 

What on earth are you talking about? Beta Phase 4 just finished, and there were 2 issues -- and only 2 issues. BOTH were related to server problems -- because it was a server stress test.

 

Maybe, you should stop spouting BS you read online as truth when you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

FFXIV may not be a perfect game, but there are 0 issues with the installer, 0 issues with the patcher, and 0 errors reported in P4 that weren't related to the entire point of the beta. . .

 

Are you talking about 1.0? You know, the game that doesn't exist anymore?

[MahneWarrior]

I don't think FFXIV is really focusing on bringing in new players -- I think they're riding off of the FF brand. And that is why I think they'll survive.

 

I don't think it'll be some monumental success -- but it definitely has an installed playerbase that will stick around for the nostalgia, so long as they keep pumping out content and keep it polished.

 

Reminds me of SWTOR. How many people stay with this game because it is Star Wars? How many because it is F2P, or because they have a community they play with and love?

 

I agree, I highly doubt SE is aiming for a 5 million player base. They are looking to please their current market, first and foremost. After they establish themselves with their current player base then over time they can expand to other player bases.

 

That is what Bioware should have done at the start. Make a game for star wars fans first, expand on everything they expect a star wars fan would enjoy, and once they establish that player base, move on to conquer other player bases. Rome was not built in a day.

[Covaltage]

I know I liked SWTOR more as a sub-only game. Not saying that I haven't enjoyed some of the changes made since the change to F2P, but I could totally do without the Cartel Market and the nickel-and-diming approach to item access, even if that meant fewer new vanity items on a regular basis. Apparently, the majority of the MMO market does not see things that way. *shrug*

 

The SW setting and quest-heavy theme drew me here, and I'm content for now. If I ever join another MMO, it will have at least a sub option, if not be sub-only. No interest at all in Final Fantasy, though.

 

Same, I'm gone when I find a game as fun as this one but without micro transactions. I just find it kind of insulting to put a $ value on my gameplay. I mean, if it takes me 2 hours to grind up 400K creds, but anyone with a credit card can get that amount by selling an item they bought for $5.00, I was essentially paid $2.50/hr for my effort. When it comes to grinding credits, ask yourself, "would it be more effective use of my time to go beg for change on the side of the highway and spend that money on cartel items? Or actually playing the game?"

[CharlieBrown]

The problem with talking using Blizzard's rebooting of Titan as an example is there is no indication that payment model has anything to do with their decision. It sounds like it's more of a need to completely redesign the game play aspect. And WoW's subscriptions have not declined that significantly. Their numbers have bounced up and down 1-2 million give or take a few several times over the years, and they're still so far above every other game in numbers that there is no reason for them to even consider a free to play model yet.

 

What I heard was that they changed they are going to change their combat system away from tab target selection, like swtor and wow, to "skill shots" like WildStar & MOBA games like Smite.

[Hockaday]

What on earth are you talking about? Beta Phase 4 just finished, and there were 2 issues -- and only 2 issues. BOTH were related to server problems -- because it was a server stress test.

 

Maybe, you should stop spouting BS you read online as truth when you have no clue what you are talking about.

 

FFXIV may not be a perfect game, but there are 0 issues with the installer, 0 issues with the patcher, and 0 errors reported in P4 that weren't related to the entire point of the beta. . .

 

Are you talking about 1.0? You know, the game that doesn't exist anymore?

 

smh...some people's children. Read something for once. Just...read! lol. Yes, Phase 4, got the key back in july. It just happened. The game would not install. It has been happening for a long time. The only suggestions are to disable everything on your computer, and pray it works.

 

I stand by what I have said. Can't make an installer, won't be able to make a proper game. Stop being so blind.

[Kilora]

smh...some people's children. Read something for once. Just...read! lol. Yes, Phase 4, got the key back in july. It just happened. The game would not install. It has been happening for a long time. The only suggestions are to disable everything on your computer, and pray it works.

 

I stand by what I have said. Can't make an installer, won't be able to make a proper game. Stop being so blind.

 

Ok, so you're the only person who has had this problem?

 

Not a single thread on the beta forums. Not a single post on the subreddit.

 

And, guess what? You didn't gey a P4 key in July. There were no keys for P4 prior to the day beta started. It was an open-beta. One that happened to break Japans record for concurrent connections in a video game.

 

But you're right -- that means they can't make a launcher. Should they take lessons from SWTOR? LOL

[asbalana]

http://venturebeat.com/2013/06/17/final-fantasy-online-director-defends-monthly-subscriptions-in-the-golden-age-of-free-to-play-exclusive/

 

Great article there on why sub only mmos are better then free to play games.

 

I don't know if the game will be good or bad, but I will take a look at it.

 

I prefer a sub based model and hate the nickel and dime and p2w aspects the current swtor model.

 

There is, in my mind, great potential and demand for a sub based game. The failures to date have been in the game's part in that they have been of low quality with little support.

 

To those who hve pointed to WOW, I would look back to the pre Cata days. GC came in and destroyed WOW and turned it from a great sub based experience to a poor shadow of what it was, treated customers (the dreaded casuals) with comtempt, and dumbed it down considerably. The old saw that said that no other game will kill WOW, WOW will kill WOW turned out to be true and the loss of subs is a direct result of designers and decision makers that were totally out of touch with their player base and "did it their way".

[Atma]

http://venturebeat.com/2013/06/17/final-fantasy-online-director-defends-monthly-subscriptions-in-the-golden-age-of-free-to-play-exclusive/

 

Great article there on why sub only mmos are better then free to play games.

 

His assessment is spot on.

[curtkram]

it really doesn't seem like that common of a problem. delete old patches in your my documents, make sure you don't have a firewall blocking access to ports they need to have open.....

 

and you know, it is a beta. they don't do beta tests so you can preview the game or so you can have fun. the point is to find what problems are going to pop up so they can fix them before it goes live. hopefully they saw this problem and were able to fix it.

[Arkerus]

I don't know if the game will be good or bad, but I will take a look at it.

 

I prefer a sub based model and hate the nickel and dime and p2w aspects the current swtor model.

 

There is, in my mind, great potential and demand for a sub based game. The failures to date have been in the game's part in that they have been of low quality with little support.

 

To those who hve pointed to WOW, I would look back to the pre Cata days. GC came in and destroyed WOW and turned it from a great sub based experience to a poor shadow of what it was, treated customers (the dreaded casuals) with comtempt, and dumbed it down considerably. The old saw that said that no other game will kill WOW, WOW will kill WOW turned out to be true and the loss of subs is a direct result of designers and decision makers that were totally out of touch with their player base and "did it their way".

 

There are so many things wrong with this post I don't even know where to start. The mind boggles and I'd rather run my bounty hunter quests.

[curtkram]

so anyway, eso just released their payment model and they agree with everyone else that when designing a new game, they don't listen to andryah or bioware white knights.

[lorelthesecond]

so anyway, eso just released their payment model and they agree with everyone else that when designing a new game, they don't listen to andryah or bioware white knights.

 

yep http://m.gamestar.de/artikel/the-elder-scrolls-online,3026853.html so much for sub games being dead lol

[Yungscion]

so anyway, eso just released their payment model and they agree with everyone else that when designing a new game, they don't listen to andryah or bioware white knights.

 

While I don't find BW monetization of SWTOR to be odious, I do find the ransoming of credits on premium and F2P players to be pretty low and almost a text book definition of nickle-and-dime, so I would not consider myself a white knigh to BW, I still find subs in this day and age suspicious.

 

Wildstar - completely new IP made by a bunch of old school WoW devs

FFXIV - remake of an existing IP that was sub based

TESO - MMO of a very very popular console/PC rpg

 

I have a feeling none of these intend to stay P2P, no matter how good they are, the initial buy-in to build a player base is too steep in the face of the competition. WoW with its sub numbers already, and then most other cult MMO's being B2P (GW2), Freemium (SWTOR, Rift, etc), and flat out F2P MOBA's I don't see them attracting the crowds needed to sustain P2P. I see this as an means of making as much money in the first 6months as possible before the reevaluate staying P2P. If they are comfortable with their sub numbers and they hold steady they may stay P2P, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

This of course is my opinion, but industry trends are what they are, and all three of these guys are trying to buck it (and just by the nature of them competing against each other as well as everything else on the market, I don't see it happening).

 

Personally I would prefer to see either a B2P or a F2D (D = Download) but requires $6-$8/month sub. This makes the initial buy in minimal (you either get the game for free and need to pay a minimal access fee, or you just buy the game and get access for free). Tack on a cosmetic only cash shop (I like SWTOR's cash shop other then the credit ransoming) and don't try to keep in game money low (GW2's biggest monetization problem) and you're good to go.

 

EDIT: I'll also finish, that while I had intended to play Wildstar and give TESO a very serious look, I will now be avoiding all of these, and probably leaving the MMO genre altogether (more then just monetization reasons, but this is more or less the proverbial straw that broke the camels back).

Edited August 21, 2013 by Yungscion

[curtkram]

the swtor folks said they only needed 500,000 subs to stay above water. i guess in all honesty, maybe 'only' is not a good qualifier, and that is really a lot of players. for final fantasy and eso, i would say basing numbers off 500,000 consistent subscribers is not an unreasonable target. if they need 1,000,000 or more, maybe their plan is based on overly optimistic assumptions.

 

also, they can charge for expansions. when i think about eso, i think about the single player game. this is a failure of logic, but i do it anyway for my own entertainment, and temper my expectation understanding matt firor is not and never will be todd howard, and zenimax online is not bethesda. anyway, the single player game has a fairly high box cost, plus they released fairly regular dlc for an additional fee, along with free bug-fixing updates that included some additional content. if the single player game can follow that model and remain successful, i believe the online game can charge and additional $15/mo to cover server costs and such, and still remain successful. but as i said before, that is putting matt firor in todd howard's shoes, which is a pretty big assumption to begin with.

 

edited to respond to:

This of course is my opinion, but industry trends are what they are, and all three of these guys are trying to buck it (and just by the nature of them competing against each other as well as everything else on the market, I don't see it happening).

the people you're referring to are not 'bucking the trend.' the people you're referring to are the industry. they establish what the industry is, what it does, and what the trends will be. people talking on a forum do not get to make those decisions. from my vantage point, it seems all AAA mmo's are going to continue to follow the subscription model. i think wildstar is not really competing with eso and ff arr, and that's why they're building a model with more flexibility in their subscription model. i think it will be a great game, but they don't have have the same branding eso and final fantasy have, and their cartoony graphics are risky.

Edited August 21, 2013 by curtkram

[Yungscion]

the people you're referring to are not 'bucking the trend.' the people you're referring to are the industry. they establish what the industry is, what it does, and what the trends will be. people talking on a forum do not get to make those decisions. from my vantage point, it seems all AAA mmo's are going to continue to follow the subscription model. i think wildstar is not really competing with eso and ff arr, and that's why they're building a model with more flexibility in their subscription model. i think it will be a great game, but they don't have have the same branding eso and final fantasy have, and their cartoony graphics are risky.

 

a) three studios does not equal an entire industry

b) the industry is varied and has varied pricing schemes from P2P to B2P to F2P

c) these 3 AAA MMO's are bucking the trend as not a single MMO released in the last 5 years has maintained a P2P pricing model (Rift managed to make it the furthest at 2+)

d) most of the games the converted to F2P have managed to survive and in some cases flurish

e) while the trend has not been to start F2P the trend is to convert to F2P within 2years

 

We'll see how these three do, but make no mistake, they along with every other MMO compete against one another. While the may have different themes, at the end of the day they are all persistent online worlds that require time investment. Since time is a limited resource, the compete against each other.

[Andryah]

I have a feeling none of these intend to stay P2P, no matter how good they are, the initial buy-in to build a player base is too steep in the face of the competition. WoW with its sub numbers already, and then most other cult MMO's being B2P (GW2), Freemium (SWTOR, Rift, etc), and flat out F2P MOBA's I don't see them attracting the crowds needed to sustain P2P. I see this as an means of making as much money in the first 6months as possible before the reevaluate staying P2P. If they are comfortable with their sub numbers and they hold steady they may stay P2P, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Accurate assessment IMO, regardless of the marketing position taken by Matt Firor on ESO. Matt is far from a leader in industry business models or trends in MMOs. Heck, he's not even an industry leader in MMO innovations at all. He is pitching what he HAS to to in order to prepare his game for box sales at launch. No more, no less.

 

IF industry trends have any meaning at all (and I believe they do).. it is that MMO companies speak one thing leading up to launch and then do something else after launch. Trend wise.. this is particularly the case with MMO business models in the last 3-4 years. NOBODY says/admits Freemium at launch (yet).. yet post launch in the modern era.. they all become Freemium. That IS the trend today. That trend too however will end.... either by a willingness to cut the BS and be honest up front with players.. or with a wider shift to B2P+microtransactions (the GW2 model). The tipping point, where producers finally are honest about their long term business models for MMOs.. is when the genre has moved entirely away from retail boxes, gone digital only, and are willing to forego the box sales revenue cash cow that comes with a launch. The real problem with reaching honesty here is that the MMO market is controlled by a few large corporations that control product sales/distribution to consumers..and they want the cow fully milked before sending it to slaughter (which used to be "shut-down" but now days is some form of freemium model).

Edited August 21, 2013 by Andryah

[Yungscion]

Accurate assessment IMO, regardless of the marketing position taken by Matt Firor on ESO. Matt is far from a leader in industry business models or trends in MMOs. Heck, he's not even an industry leader in MMO innovations at all. He is pitching what he HAS to to in order to prepare his game for box sales at launch. No more, no less.

 

IF industry trends have any meaning at all (and I believe they do).. it is that MMO companies speak one thing leading up to launch and then do something else after launch. Trend wise.. this is particularly the case with MMO business models in the last 3-4 years. NOBODY says/admits Freemium at launch (yet).. yet post launch in the modern era.. they all become Freemium. That IS the trend today. That trend too however will end.... either by a willingness to cut the BS and be honest up front with players.. or with a wider shift to B2P+microtransactions (the GW2 model). The tipping point, where producers finally are honest about their long term business models for MMOs.. is when the genre has moved entirely away from retail boxes, gone digital only, and are willing to forego the box sales revenue cash cow that comes with a launch.

 

Polygon had a good article after E3 this year about just this. With both MS and Sony talking launch day F2P games on XBONE and PS4 this is the future and sooner or later, the other studios will be honest and upfront about it as there will be less of a stigma.

[Kilora]

a) three studios does not equal an entire industry

b) the industry is varied and has varied pricing schemes from P2P to B2P to F2P

c) these 3 AAA MMO's are bucking the trend as not a single MMO released in the last 5 years has maintained a P2P pricing model (Rift managed to make it the furthest at 2+)

d) most of the games the converted to F2P have managed to survive and in some cases flurish

e) while the trend has not been to start F2P the trend is to convert to F2P within 2years

 

We'll see how these three do, but make no mistake, they along with every other MMO compete against one another. While the may have different themes, at the end of the day they are all persistent online worlds that require time investment. Since time is a limited resource, the compete against each other.

 

a) correct. there is no industry, really, as there is no cut-off for inclusion. These 3 studios, however, would EASILY be considered the veterans and leaders.

b) this is true

c) not a single AAA MMO has ever been released F2P, or converted to F2P. The three we are talking about, however, are on track to be AAA MMOs. Meaning they are not bucking the trend at all, they are solidifying it.

d) I'd say survive, not flourish. I've yet to see a F2P MMO that is actually a quality product.

e) that has been a trend with games that were overly-hyped and released as sub-par

[CosmicKat]

a) three studios does not equal an entire industry

b) the industry is varied and has varied pricing schemes from P2P to B2P to F2P

c) these 3 AAA MMO's are bucking the trend as not a single MMO released in the last 5 years has maintained a P2P pricing model (Rift managed to make it the furthest at 2+)

d) most of the games the converted to F2P have managed to survive and in some cases flurish

e) while the trend has not been to start F2P the trend is to convert to F2P within 2years

 

We'll see how these three do, but make no mistake, they along with every other MMO compete against one another. While the may have different themes, at the end of the day they are all persistent online worlds that require time investment. Since time is a limited resource, the compete against each other.

 

- The ONLY MMO's that have ever been unqualified successes have been subscription based. Some, like Everquest and CoH, went F2P only long after they had become "old" and already made their fortunes.

 

- The ONLY MMO's that launched as subscription based, and then quickly switched to F2P models have all done so because they failed to attract and/or retain customers.

 

- Don't believe any player numbers you hear/read/see. Anyone who was playing MMO's 15 years ago can tell you that a game with 300k active subscribers 15 years ago looked suspiciously a lot busier than any today with twice those reported numbers. Either they grossly under-reported numbers back in the day, they grossly over-report numbers now, or a combination of the two.

Edited August 21, 2013 by CosmicKat

[Yungscion]

a) correct. there is no industry, really, as there is no cut-off for inclusion. These 3 studios, however, would EASILY be considered the veterans and leaders.

 

Wildstar is Carbine's first MMO. While the company is made of industry veterans this is their combined first effort. We will see if they work well together

 

TESO is Zenimax Online's first offering. Again same as Carbine this isn't the individual employees fist foray into the industry, but this is their first attempt as a team.

 

Rift had a ton of industry experience but was Trion's first, they are now F2P

 

The industry trend is F2P, regardless of how you arrive there. My hope is that these studios would start to embrace it and design their games as F2P or B2P from the get go and avoid all the things the make the conversions annoying.