Forum Settings
       
This Forum is Read Only

Urgh! Is this the MMO trend of the future?Follow

#52 Feb 04 2010 at 10:56 AM Rating: Good
Oh my Godddddddddddd

that is... saddening to say the least.
How can these people be so ignorantly blind?
it hurt just to read their fanboy replies
____________________________
Hurrr durrr
#53 Feb 04 2010 at 10:58 AM Rating: Good
***
3,530 posts
Meara wrote:

The only way to combat this is to never purchase [micro-transactions]. My husband and I got the first mini-expansion pack for FFXI and when we finished it we asked ourselves what the heck had we just bought for USD $20? It was simply an extra quest that should have been in a regular patch, not something players had to pay money for.

The security token I can understand as that is an actual item they send to you but the mog satchel should have been available in game through quests.

We've been playing STO and we're absolutely not getting any of the microtransactions and recommending to everyone else not to get them either. The moment they start adding game breaking things in the transactions, not just visual enhancements, we quit. They've already gotten close with the races.


So you protest one product by handing them money for a different product? If I am protesting Wal-Mart's selling of [insert item A], the best way to protest it is not to still walk inside Wal-Mart, and buy [insert item B]. I suppose the idea is that, if Wal-Mart continues to overstock [item A]s, they will eventually lose an amount of money (due to their initial investment in [item A]) and therefore stop selling them: a very slow solution that boarders on the contradictory, since I would be supporting the ones who are doing the things I was not supporting.

The situation is slightly different in the case of MMOs however, because it doesn't cost the developers much money to make items available through RMT: such items are simply digital, after all, simply purposely-excluded bits of code. As long as you keep giving the company money, they really couldn't care less whether you buy some of their micro-transactions. Even if they made such items available through the game instead of RMT, they would still only be getting your monthly fee!

There is thus no reason for them to stop RMT, since you pay the same fee whether you use their cash shop or not! From their standpoint, even if just about nobody uses the micro-transaction methods, it is better to have a bunch of fees and the chance of someone using the cash shop than only a bunch of fees.

Thus, they either cave to your demands, eliminate their RMT, and only receive your monthly fee; or resist your demands, continue "non-game-breaking" RMT, and only receive your monthly fee.
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

"Thus opium is pleasing... on account of the agreeable delirium it produces." (Burke para.6)

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#54 Feb 04 2010 at 11:09 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
I just don't see how people can say MMOs aren't making money.

XI, being a a medium sized server population, with an average of $14/month and around a low-ball number of 250,000 is making around $3.5 million a month. WoW is making upwards of $20 million a month. Now I have no idea how much it costs to run that many servers, but probably no-where near that amount.
#55 Feb 04 2010 at 11:20 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
You use two so far successful companies with their equally successfull games to boot, Cryptic are the polar opposite of Blizzard and SE. They are either struggling very much (despite cost cutting and producing less than adequet MMOs) and just seem to be trying to claw as much back as possible.

The early signs of struggling are appearing anyway - just this morning it was announced that Daeke, the community manager at CO resigned. He's been taking it on the chin ever since he announced that the first tiny expansion was going to be a paid for content.

Mind you ot was also announced that STO have a million subscribers, but these are numbers from Atari - I winder just how many they had before I and many like me cancelled the pre-order before it went live.

Edited, Feb 4th 2010 12:22pm by akelah
#56 Feb 04 2010 at 12:15 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
630 posts
akelah wrote:
You use two so far successful companies with their equally successfull games to boot, Cryptic are the polar opposite of Blizzard and SE. They are either struggling very much (despite cost cutting and producing less than adequet MMOs) and just seem to be trying to claw as much back as possible.


I understand that, but with those types of revenue even having 50,000 people at $14 a month will yield $700,000/month. being a video game manufacture they don't have a lot of inventory overhead and supplies. It is very easy for them to stay lean and with the MMO business model they shouldn't fail. if they do it is an obvious sign that they are not good at creating a MMO.
#57 Feb 04 2010 at 12:21 PM Rating: Decent
akelah wrote:
You use two so far successful companies with their equally successfull games to boot, Cryptic are the polar opposite of Blizzard and SE. They are either struggling very much (despite cost cutting and producing less than adequet MMOs) and just seem to be trying to claw as much back as possible.

The early signs of struggling are appearing anyway - just this morning it was announced that Daeke, the community manager at CO resigned. He's been taking it on the chin ever since he announced that the first tiny expansion was going to be a paid for content.

Mind you ot was also announced that STO have a million subscribers, but these are numbers from Atari - I winder just how many they had before I and many like me cancelled the pre-order before it went live.


Any time an MMO spins off from a previously established franchise (ie. Final Fantasy, Warcraft, Star Trek) it's not uncommon for them to start off with a very healthy subscriber base. Give it 3-6 months and see who is still sticking around...that's a better indicator of how well the game has done. MMOs can be extremely expensive to produce and they need a lot of people to sign up (and pay) to play in the first year just to recover their production costs much less cover the server maintenance costs and pay for the production of new content.

I think that within the next several years we're going to see a defined gap emerge between games that offer only trivial micro transactions and games that basically open the shop doors to anyone who has money to spend. I also expect that micro transactions on some level are here to stay in MMOs. Agree with the concept or not, it's a potentially huge money maker for game studios and game studios are still businesses at the end of the day. It's just a question of whether or not a particular studio respects their customers enough to limit the scope of those transactions so that Bob Frugal doesn't get left out of all of the endgame activities because he's not willing to spend a whack of cash to gear his character.

I personally don't see full-scope micro transactions ever becoming mainstream in North America/Europe and probably even Japan, but countries like Korea lap it up. Minor aesthetic options available as micro-transactions don't make a game any less playable for people who don't want to spend more than their monthly subscription fee + expansions for their game of choice.
#58 Feb 04 2010 at 1:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
I personally don't see full-scope micro transactions ever becoming mainstream in North America/Europe and probably even Japan, but countries like Korea lap it up. Minor aesthetic options available as micro-transactions don't make a game any less playable for people who don't want to spend more than their monthly subscription fee + expansions for their game of choice.


And usually I don't mind those transactions, I have been guilty of buying some in other games and would again - IF its done right.

What I don't to see is the likes of STO, a character race, clearly made and ready to go out at launch date, but they put it in the c-store and insist people buy it.

Its like DLC on xbox, a number of titles have come under fire for so called, releasing new content months after the game has been out, when in actual fact this supossed new content was already present on the disk, all you bought was the unlock code.

Resident Evil 5 to name but one. They recently made DLC available so you can play the mecenaries multiplayer as two more characters. I was against this before I even knew it was already on the disk, as I played Resident Evil and RE2 - the later has a whole load of content spread across two disks. It just seems the growing trend is to make the content, lock it away and make us pay extra to open it up. IMO if its on the disk - or complete by launch, its yours when you buy it.
#59 Feb 04 2010 at 1:59 PM Rating: Decent
**
621 posts
Why did my latest post in this thread get defaulted? I'm in no way for micro-transactions and would prefer them not being in at all. I'm just saying that if they must include micro-transaction I hope they only allow you to get useless stuff that only has cosmetic value.

Edited, Feb 4th 2010 9:02pm by insanekangaroo
____________________________
Kweh?!

...prophesizing the golden patch since october 2010.
#60 Feb 04 2010 at 6:34 PM Rating: Default
insanekangaroo wrote:
Why did my latest post in this thread get defaulted? I'm in no way for micro-transactions and would prefer them not being in at all. I'm just saying that if they must include micro-transaction I hope they only allow you to get useless stuff that only has cosmetic value.


The 3 Rules of Karma Club

1) There is no Karma Club.
2) Never, NEVER talk about your karma.
3) There is no Karma Club.
#61 Feb 05 2010 at 9:53 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
42 posts
I'm certainly not a fan of micro transactions. When it comes to a subscription based game, I distinctly dislike the idea even more. However, if it was to be the case, fluff items wouldn't be too bad to deal with.

The only other items I could think of that I wouldn't mind too much to be sold is event items. I believe UO does something like this (although if I'm not mistaken they also offer a host of other things that I'm not too keen on). Items that are available during certain periods but will no longer be available, so it also acts as a way to allow newer players to obtain certain items that are not being offered anymore.

If they do go the way of a online store, I'd consider it almost vital that they also add in some way (other than just spending money) to get currency to buy from that store. It doesn't have to be something as simple as farming or converting in-game money for online money. It could be a promotion that happens every so often that allows people to get that one or two items they may want without having to spend extra or a reward for doing well on a mini game. At least this way, if you don't feel like spending $5 for a staff or robe costume you could, provided that you aren't buying other things, potentially get that item for free.

It combines the prospect of a store which the company could make money from, and helps to ensure that other than those who want to pay extra, you aren't forced to contribute anything. That's probably the best solution to the two approaches I could think of. Of course, personally, not having the store at all is the best approach to me.
#62 Feb 06 2010 at 9:46 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Well my biggest problem with it is they charge you the full standard mmo price of $15/month on top of the C-Store. I mean if it was like $10/month with micro transition than I can see that the store is helping everyone by lowering cost.

Atari has stated Cryptic has a total of 1 million subscribers total. That's $15 million a month. I'm no expert but there is no way they spend $15 million a month on server/etc, or even $10 mil for that matter.
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#63 Feb 06 2010 at 11:33 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
Atari has stated Cryptic has a total of 1 million subscribers total. That's $15 million a month. I'm no expert but there is no way they spend $15 million a month on server/etc, or even $10 mil for that matter.


Ah but your forgetting, they wont actually have that yet. So far everyone is on their free 30 days, I can see those numbers dropping dramatically if they don't do something soon! I've already seen at least one person trying to get their LTS back, I don't think they'll get it, but it just goes to show you how shady these guys are.

I don't know if any of you read Massively.com but one of their articles has o respond to the sheer amount of hate mail directed at Massively and STO - claiming that Massively had been paid to write good things about STO. I don't think they do, their articles are usually very objective and simply report news from the devs (which is going to be optimistic anyway). But that alone gives me the impression that the reports of 1 Million is a bit of an over statement by cryptic.
#64 Feb 06 2010 at 11:51 AM Rating: Decent
**
566 posts
dyvidd wrote:
I'm no expert but there is no way they spend $15 million a month on server/etc, or even $10 mil for that matter.



Production costs, licensing fees, etc. etc. Just because an MMO has the potential to make good cash after it has been out for a while, doesn't mean it's a profit the month or even the 6th month it launches.
#65 Feb 06 2010 at 12:42 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
Production costs, licensing fees, etc. etc. Just because an MMO has the potential to make good cash after it has been out for a while, doesn't mean it's a profit the month or even the 6th month it launches.


Not sure if there is any truth to this statement but I heard that Cryptic recieved a $20 million bonus for launching the game on time, so they ain't doing so bad. And then we have one-million x $60... They've made a tidy sum already and that isn't counting those who purchased the Life time subscription.

Also, I'm not sure how this would affect Cryptics over all spendature since a good portion of the work and licencing would have been sorted by the studio who originally started the project.
#66 Feb 06 2010 at 1:14 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,842 posts
Ah, 1 million subscribers total not just STO. I'm talking about games already out so they already have a cash flow going.
____________________________
FFXIV Dyvid (Awaiting 2.0)
FFXI Dyvid ~ Pandemonium (Retired)
SWTOR Dy'vid Legacy - Canderous Ordo
#67 Feb 08 2010 at 7:17 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
Ah, 1 million subscribers total not just STO. I'm talking about games already out so they already have a cash flow going.


Ah, no I was talking about STO itself. Check out Massively.com they just done an article about it - and I get the impression who eveyr wrote it seems to think thats a bit of an exageration too.
#68 Feb 09 2010 at 5:30 PM Rating: Good
7 posts
dyvidd wrote:
Man, after having my proverbial internet a$$ ripped on the other thread it's refreshing to be among people with common sense. I mean I can at least justify the add-content because you got a story line mission with an item that was the reward or even the tidal tailsman because you get a RL pendant that I hang up in my car. But to just pay money for an in-game item that should have come free with updates, that a whole different level.

I think STO is fun for now but I know I'll drop it quick when FFXIV comes.


Yeah, I agree with your post over there also. I'm playing STO and will switch when FFXIV comes out. In general I've felt like the forums for STO were very hostile. It's normal and healthy for people to disagree but it would be nice if people could be civil about it.
#69 Feb 10 2010 at 2:38 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
People wouldn't be so agressive if the company itself wasn't trying to milk as much money out of the players as possible. For a time the boards over at Champions were agressive for a while too and just look at whats been announced today. The expansion they had intended to charge for is now free. The Players - after much unrest and negative feedback have finally gotten what they should have been entitled too from the company all along.

I'm sure once they apply that same level of competancy to STO then the boards will settle down.

Cryptics management methods leave a lot to be desired, but I can forgive and forget so long as they actually learn from this experience.
#70 Feb 11 2010 at 3:20 PM Rating: Good
*****
11,539 posts
Optional content I don't care that much about.

Expansions are a given.

But if I have to pay more money beyond my monthly fee to keep up with the Joneses, **** that.
____________________________
[ffxisig]55836[/ffxisig]

Mikhalia: and FWIW, my posts are 95% helpful, informative, or funny.
Mikhalia: only 5% or less of my posts are utter crap.
Tyapex: 393 posts of utter crap...
Mikhalia: Sounds about right.
#71 Feb 12 2010 at 2:37 PM Rating: Decent

Well SE is releasing gamepot inc (Japanese co.) MMO Fantasy Earth Zero state side very soon. Its a very cool f2p mmo with over 300k subscribers over on east already. Im not saying that FFXI or XIV wont use the currency at all but its very safe to say that SE is incorporating this currency with mostly FEZ in mind. Its a very high scale f2p, if you havent checked it out google it.
#72 Feb 13 2010 at 10:20 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,448 posts
The only thing we can do is vote with our dollars. STO's release has less than 30 hours of non cookie-cutter content at best. That's not even a full RPG game. That's like reaching Virmire in mass effect and then it saying 'to be continued...' or seeing the airship CS' just before the battle in CoP, then SE saying lolwups to be continued in FFXV.

This may be the trend of the future, but if so the future will find itself with very few long-lasting MMOs. One thing we can be certain about is that SE is so hard-headed about controlling the development of their games, they most certainly will NOT fall prey to such a gimmicky scheme.

I joined a STO fleet back in 2008, being a huge star trek fan myself. I haven't had the guts to tell them I won't be playing with them, though. I've known some of these people longer than some of my FFXI friends, and I played xi 04-08. We're so close, and it ****** me off cryptic did this. STO needs another year in development. Or at least 6 months hard-core dev time and another 4-6 months beta.

On the subject of micro-transactions, as long as it's asthetic stuff like clothing visual options, mog house(moghouse equivilant in XIV) furnishings etc, then I don't see them being an issue. With that kind of micro-transaction structure, SE is basically getting money from the hardcore players who don't mind and may -want- to pay extra for more options, for adventures in role-playing and whatnot. I know I would.
____________________________
Currently Playing: FFXIV:ARR
Lacaan Vasiim:Cactuar
Free Company:Cactuar Corp<CCorp>
catwho wrote:
If you need a bard to get "good exp" in a merit party, you're the weakest link.
#73 Feb 18 2010 at 11:05 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
149 posts
I think that a lot of people have become spoiled by Blizzard and other developers. Cryptic tried to charge money for their next CO expansion, which is only 5 months after the game was released. As I'm sure the internets are aware, the nerd rage was immense. However, lets do some math:

Everquest 1
Age: 10 years
Paid Expansions: 16
Free Expansions: 0
Agv. Time between paid expansion: 7.5 months
Total cost for all expansions: $480

Final Fantasy XI
Age: 6.5 years
Paid Expansions: 3
Free Expansions: 1
Agv. Time between paid expansion: 2.2 years
Total cost for all expansions: $90

Everquest 2
Age: 5 years
Paid Expansions: 6
Free Expansions: 3
Agv. Time between paid expansion: 10 months
Total cost for all expansions: $180

World of Warcraft
Age: 5 years
Paid Expansions: 2
Free Expansions: 10
Agv. Time between paid expansion: 2.5 years
Total cost for all expansions: $60


So clearly one company, Sony, made $480 extra per customer over the base price of buying the original game and paying monthly fees, yet only averaged 7.5 months between expansions. Why is it such a big deal that Cryptic wants to charge $10 for their next large expansion?

Well, as far as I can tell, the only intelligent response is "Well, times have changed." Looking from my data, that response is, in fact, the case. Blizzard gave away 10 free content patches that were large enough that other companies would have charged for them. But Blizzard didn't. In the words of Lord Cutler Beckett, "It's just good business." Look at the trend of the free expansions. It is constantly growing, and the paid expansions is diminishing.

What Cryptic and others are doing now seems to be "bad business" to its customer base, despite clearly being good business for Sony.


Edited, Feb 18th 2010 11:09am by Maarg
#74 Feb 18 2010 at 12:02 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
So obviously, having a cash shop is how developers are able to provide content that some players want while still being able to generate the extra revenue required to provide the free content updates that all players now demand.

There are two other cash shop scenarios (one that was mentioned already about squashing RMT).

1) Free to play games using cash shops to squash RMT: Of course, no one really minds having a cash shop in these games because of course that is the way that the game gets enough revenue to continue releasing free content without charging either an up-front retail cost or a monthly cost. However, what about if you could buy items or upgrades to items that you could also get if you just played the game?

Gala-net is big into this one with their g-potatoes. There are items in the game that can increase the stats on your armor or weapons, e.g. Sword + Enhancement Stone = Sword +1. Sword +1 + Enhancement Stone = Sword +2. This is very common in free mmos. These in-game items usually cost some (insanely large) amount of gold to obtain. When there is a demand for gold and a lack of demand for farming, of course then you get RMT, gold spammers, hackers, etc. What Gala-net does to combat RMT is to provide these Enhancement Stones via the cash shop for less than what it would take to buy the gold from an RMT to purchase the item in-game. Of course there are numerous other quality-of-life items you can buy only with g-potatoes like "eat this and the next time you die, you don't lose XP."

2) Cash shops used to allow users to only buy content that they want: Lets say that your favorite MMO releases a new expansion at your local retail outlet of choice for the usual $30. Lets say that 2/3rd of the content on the disk you don't give a crap about and will never see (like the Lich King raid boss at the end of the Wrath of the Lich King that less than 5% of all players will ever experience). Why should you have to pay for that? Well, what if each of the 1/3rd of the expansion was available at the cash shop for $10 each. Would you flip out? If Cryptic released a new zone for $10, a new tier of ships for $10, and a new dungeon for $10, and it was only available at the cash shop, would you flip out? I bet most people would, without ever realizing what an awesome deal they are giving you.

Also, this doesn't include the time component. Lets assume that the average expansion costs $30 and includes a new zone, a new dungeon, and a set of new "others". What if the new zone is done first, then 2 months later the new dungeon is balanced, then 2 months after that all of the "others" are finished. Wouldn't it makes sense to put that new zone on the cash shop for 1/3rd of the $30 price so that you wouldn't have to wait 4 extra months while the other parts of the expansion are being completed? Isn't this exactly what CO did, adding a new zone for $10? And who knows, maybe by the time the 4 months are up and the two other parts of the expansion are out, a new dungeon is done!

Edited, Feb 18th 2010 1:24pm by Maarg
#75 Feb 18 2010 at 4:58 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
Why is it such a big deal that Cryptic wants to charge $10 for their next large expansion?


Large?

But it was one zone and didn't expand the current cap...

I've got a couple of games under my belt, FFXI, WoW, AoC, LoTRO, WAR and CO - all of those (bar CO) I have purchased said expansions and I don't mind, I don't drink, don't smoke, don't do drugs so I have a reasonable amount to dedicate to what ever game I'm playing.

But...charging me for one new zone in the level range 37-40? That's not really an expansion, it's a patch because Lagmuria (the original area for that level range) doesn't work. They essentially tried to charge for a patch, that's why so many kicked off. But I think the fact they've now made this so called 'expansion' free says more than I ever could :)
#76 Feb 19 2010 at 8:01 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
My point is that you only consider it a "patch" because of games like warcraft, which gave away a lot of that content for free. People who play games like Everquest are not used to as much free content because all of their expansions were only of moderate size and were $30 each. Paying $10 for 1/3rd of what would normally be in an expansion isn't asking that much. Consider, of the 16 everquest 1 expansions, I think only 3 raised level caps. Don't assume that every game's expansions must always raise level caps. If you consider that warcraft's "patches" were about the size of everquest's expansions, you will realize that only 2 of the 13 warcraft expansions raised the level cap. If it wasn't for warcraft giving away a (previously) insane amount of free content, no one would complain about paying $10 for one zone, especially if it is optional to get it, for instance if you are already level 40. At least you aren't forced to pay for a zone you don't need like you would if the zone was in an expansion pack, which are almost always mandatory to buy if you play the game.
#77 Feb 19 2010 at 10:27 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
I resent paying for one zone when they can't even fix one already in the game. Its the same scenario as with STO cash-shop, offering content that should already be in the game for a price. And a paid for expansion, needs to have a lot of content otherwise where is the value for money? We pay a subscription each month which should cover patches, fixes and server use (so technically not free). All this supposed expansion was, was a patch. One area so people in the level range (a whole three levels) would have somewhere to progress without having to grind over and over in the same area they had been for the past ten levels or so...and the only reason they had to do that was because the area they should have been in to start with was broken. Some people have even lost their mains for a long time. Logging/crashing out in this area meant that you weren't likely able to log back in.

That to me is a fix, not an expansion.

The mod who announced this has even resigned from Cryptic, not long after the community spoke out against it. And now the expansion's free.

/shrug

Again that just speaks volumes.

Edited, Feb 19th 2010 11:28am by akelah
#78 Feb 19 2010 at 12:37 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
"I resent paying for one zone when they can't even fix one already in the game."
So they made a zone that is so valuable that tons of people want to be there. You know how to fix the lag in that zone? Make another zone that people want to be in, and the way to prevent everyone from moving from zone 1 to zone 2 (thus creating the lag in the new zone) is to make sure that only some of the people move there. Do you remember what happened when the Gates of Anh'Qiraj were opened in WoW? Holy crap, the servers exploded. 11,000 people trying to zone into 1 area is always bad news. Blizzard is a large enough company to deal with that; Cryptic is not.

"a paid for expansion, needs to have a lot of content otherwise where is the value for money?"
The value is 1) you don't have to pay the full expansion price of $30 for new content, 2) you don't have to wait 8-12 months for the zone to come out, 3) it fixes the lag in other zones because people move to the new zones, and 4) you don't have to pay for it at all if you are already level 40. I've never heard of a single instance of another company in a P2P MMO allow players the ability to NOT buy content that they don't want but still be able to play at the highest level.

"We pay a subscription each month which should cover patches, fixes and server use (so technically not free)."
This is a tired, old argument. If you pay a basic cable bill, does that "entitle" you all channels (HD, HBO, etc) for free, including every new channel that comes out, regardless of how much it costs to produce the new content? If you pay a monthly electrical bill but need technical support and someone comes out to your house, is it free? Of course not! Extra services are just that. If sometimes you get them for free (Age of Conan's Ymir's Pass is CO's new zone equivalent and it was free), then great, but don't expect to get it every time.

"The mod who announced this has even resigned from Cryptic, not long after the community spoke out against it."
I could not find any proof that anyone resigned over this. It was a test, and it failed. That isn't to say that it will fail for other companies or for the same company at other times.

"And now the expansion's free."
Because the community QQ was more than little Cryptic could bear, and the risk outweighed the reward. Don't expect to get the same results from giants like Blizzard, Square Enix, or any other company with a spine. I'm sure the 6 million people in China (who can't play wrath of the lich king due to their crazy government rules) would happily pay $10 for a new zone to play in, regardless of the QQ that NA and EU players would toss up at having to pay $10 for a new mid-level zone. It is all risk vs. reward. For Cryptic, it was too much risk.
#79 Feb 19 2010 at 12:48 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
Quote:
Also, I'm not sure how this would affect Cryptics over all spendature since a good portion of the work and licencing would have been sorted by the studio who originally started the project.


Perpetual Entertainment kept all the original work and Atari had to pay the entire cost for the licensing again. Cryptic started with jack squat. The licensing rights are usually monthly rights, too, just like how every single use of a song entitles royalties to the band. Depending on their contract with the farm they rent servers from, they may have to pay for a whole year, regardless of whether 400,000 people quit on day 2. MMOs can be a risky venture for publishers. Also, Cryptic gets a lot of flak for this $10 expansion thing, but there's no telling if it was even their idea. It could have been Atari's idea that Cryptic was forced to take the heat for.
#80 Feb 19 2010 at 1:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
You know how to fix the lag in that zone? Make another zone that people want to be in,


Not sure you completely understood the problem they had with this zone, even after people openly avoided it - after they admitted there was a massive problem with the zone and after a supposed fix it was still borked. Releasing an expansion to fix a hole like that and charging for it, is not good business sense and...people noticed, enough to send in a lot of negative feedback. Those people and what they accomplished will speak and say more than you ever could when you try to rationalise Cryptics choices.

I'm not going to say anything further. I know what happened, I actually played through COs and STO and from both experiences I have made up my own mind for my own reasons and I am not alone in this. So please stop trying to tell me I'm wrong for...what ever reason. I don't appreciate it when a company tries to swindle me. And they seldom keep my interests/custom after the fact.

Quote:
I could not find any proof that anyone resigned over this. It was a test, and it failed. That isn't to say that it will fail for other companies or for the same company at other times.


Today, Cryptic_Stormshade confirmed what the Champions Online community was speculating on since the early morning hours -- that Cryptic_Daeke, the Champions Online community manager, has parted ways with Cryptic Studios.

David "Daeke" Bass's leaving comes amidst heavy fire from the community on Cryptic's most recent endeavor, the addition of Vibora Bay in Champions Online. Daeke was the first member of the Cryptic staff to acknowledge that Vibora Bay would be a piece of paid content, and not a free patch to the game.

The switch in community managers is sudden and unexpected, leaving many in the Champions Online community wondering if this event and Vibora Bay's announcement are somehow related. Stormshade, however, has declined to speak any further on Daeke's departure, simply stating, "Daeke has moved on to other things. We wish him the best of luck wherever that path takes him."

Stormshade has now stepped away from Star Trek Online to become the new CM for Champions. We here at Massively would also like to take the time to wish Daeke the best and luck with whatever he pursues next.


Here's the link.

http://www.massively.com/2010/02/03/community-manager-daeke-leaves-cryptic-stormshade-to-replace-him/

And - yeah, that could be completely innocent, we'll never know for sure.

Quote:
Because the community QQ was more than little Cryptic could bear, and the risk outweighed the reward. Don't expect to get the same results from giants like Blizzard, Square Enix, or any other company with a spine.


There's truth in what you say but spine is nothing to do with it. Those companies produce quality products and have a very good reputation, everything I've bought from them or ever seen them produce has that same signiture quality. I know for a fact that SE have been on the verge of bankrupcy but still poured all they had into one last game - that went on to save the company. Moral of the story is this. Produce a good quality product and people will keep buying it. Cryptic needed to sort/finish there original instalment before launching any payable expansions.

And (at least one topic) 103 pages isn't QQ - that's outrage!

But from what I've been reading lately they're pulling their socks up! The community feels a little more stable and they won an award of some kind too, add to that the devs have opened up a bit more and become part of the active community, maybe they can turn it around. I hope they can. What really drove the nail for me was opening a c-store in STO when the game was only in the head-start. To me that's content made ready for launch but they're charging for it when people have just paid for the game. That's the thing that irked me more than anything really, everything else just added to the ill feeling.

Quote:
It could have been Atari's idea that Cryptic was forced to take the heat for.


This is something I agree with you completely on, Cryptic after all are just the studio, the tallent, Atari are the company behind them. And yes, I will give you that - me bashing Cryptic is a bit out of line when they're being made to do all this. My whole issue has only ever been with the way these things have been done.

In one interview a spokes-person for Atari was quoted as saying something along the lines of...

"We've purchased Cryptic studios, who are able to make MMO engine very cheaply."

That just tells me they're not really in it for the art or creativity we know most games designers get into the industry for...and that makes me cry!

Edited, Feb 19th 2010 2:26pm by akelah
#81 Feb 20 2010 at 12:08 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
349 posts
I love star trek. Which is precisely why I hate STO. Theres very little trek beyond the Trek window dressing. It's a poorly thought out poorly implemented game. The fanbase are indeed retards
____________________________
That was no hemroid doctor. That was an alien hoobajoob
#82 Feb 22 2010 at 10:19 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
Wow...firing a CM because he said something the company told him to is totally "shooting the messenger."

Back to the original topic, I think charging extra for content that not everyone will want is perfectly reasonable, including extra zones. I think people have been spoiled by an overabundance of free content from some major developers and should not expect similar treatment from smaller developers. And I think adding paid content more frequently than the time between paid expansions is a good idea for these smaller developers as well. Expect to see more of this in the future, even if it didn't work for Atari and Cryptic.
#83 Feb 22 2010 at 1:29 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
372 posts
I hope you're wrong :)

I hope that people who do play those smaller company games keep this up to keep those companies honest. And I hope that SE never need to try and rip us off in the same way. I hope they reward players with the occasional free content, while working their magic into the expansions I will whole-heartedly buy and feel like I've got value for my money, rather than feel like I have to buy it - otherwise...I don't have the full game.

The thing with the STO c-store revelation would be like FFXIV having four out of the five races available at the start of the game and releasing the fifth in the same week for an additional charge, how many of us here would honestly put up with that?
#84 Feb 22 2010 at 5:04 PM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Maarg wrote:
Wow...firing a CM because he said something the company told him to is totally "shooting the messenger."

Back to the original topic, I think charging extra for content that not everyone will want is perfectly reasonable, including extra zones. I think people have been spoiled by an overabundance of free content from some major developers and should not expect similar treatment from smaller developers. And I think adding paid content more frequently than the time between paid expansions is a good idea for these smaller developers as well. Expect to see more of this in the future, even if it didn't work for Atari and Cryptic.


I can't believe you actually uttered the phrase "overabundance of free content". Who's side are you on, exactly?

I'm being a little facetious, but I really do take issue with your stance. I won't pretend to know the details of financing for these games, but I know that there are examples of small companies that not only turn a profit, but actually thrive, without charging for expansions or in-game purchases. CCP is a good example, I think.

Now that being said, I'm okay with paid-expansions, within reason. But I don't think that most of this stuff is in place to keep the developer's head above water, it's there to grind some more cash out of the player base for bigger earnings.

You seem jaded about this stuff, but we as players have a great chance to put a dent in this financial model; especially now while it's still being analyzed for its effectiveness. It doesn't have to be the future of online gaming.
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#85 Feb 23 2010 at 2:32 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
149 posts
@Eske: read back a few posts to my first two walls of text. You will see that Sony gave practically zero free content patches in Everquest, but Blizzard gave 10 free content patches (which are as big as most game's expansions). 10/12 of Blizzard's expansions were free, so I'd call that an overabundance of free content. In both cases, large numbers of people were perfectly willing to pay $15 a month for the services they received, but one group had to pay $30 each for 16 expansions and one group had to pay $30 each for 2 expansions and got 10 for free.

If you really want to know my personal reason for my stance, it is because I am a software developer myself (medical billing software, not games), and there is NOTHING worse than spending 18 months developing code that you bust your *** writing, and are immensely proud of, only to be told by your bosses that "We're not going to charge the customer anything to receive the update that contained all the work you busted your *** doing. Oh and by the way, you won't be receiving a raise this year because we didn't make enough money from our customers."

@Akelah: you know what I'd love to see? A game that had 5 races and 2 factions but only came with 1 race and 1 faction, of the user's choosing, and if the user wanted more, they had to pay extra for them >>BUT<< the game cost less due to containing less. I would love to pay 33% less for an mmo because I never experienced 33% of the content, like say, the entire horde faction's quests in warcraft, and I would LOVE for other players to be able to pay extra to play both sides if they so chose.

I think what most people are getting at is that they don't like that the game only contains 90% of the actual content but that they feel they have to pay 100% of the price. I understand this completely! However, I would hate to think what would happen if they decided to raise the price of the product to include all of the (previously) extra paid content, which results in make me pay more for something I never wanted in the first place.
#86 Feb 23 2010 at 5:52 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
@Maarg - I do understand your stand-point, but you seem to think that I resent paying for any extra content, I don't. What I resent is what Cryptic are getting away with in STO.

They busted their butts making this code ready for release and I guess they're in much the same situation as you are with your line of work, as in the boss (in this case Atari) make all the financial decisions and the studio have to go along with.

They made STO and all the accompanying data to go with it, ready for release, this includes the Klingon race. During beta they were actually a selectable race but were pulled out as they needed to have some visual update. What really happened was they were pulled out so they could be sold in the c-store in the same week as the headstart.

My only gripe with this meathod of business is this. The data was there, ready for the launch - but rather than sell it with the rest of the STO package, they told their playerbase, most who in that same week would have been charged through their banks for the pre-order they made, many months before, that if they wanted the race they had to pay for it. Despite having JUST paid for the game itself. Also notice how they revealed this little quirk as everyone would have been charged for the game itself?

The same week as the headstart they open a c-store that has extra content? Thats worse than what most x-box game devs are doing now. Putting DLC up for sale and then learning that same data is already present on the disk. You already bought the disk, surely you own the rights to play what ever is on there at point of purchase? No, not these days. Its a trend that really needs to stop because companies are starting to see this as an opportunity to exploit people who enjoy this pass-time.

Extra content to me is content that comes later. C-store in game items should stay in F2P, but thats just my opinion.
#87 Feb 23 2010 at 8:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
*
149 posts
Champions Online tried to release new content that came out long after the initial release, but still tons of people railed against having to pay for that. In STO, the two "races" that were offered in the cash shop could be made by players in the game for free, plus creating the custom races makes for better characters anyway since you get to pick from all of the best skills instead of having to stick with the crappy ones that are preassigned based on your race. So all you were really paying (a whole 1 dollar) for was for someone to give you sucky skills and to pre-select your face structure and skin color. This is TOTALLY different, in my opinion, from what was done in Assassin's Creed 2, where a somewhat important chunk of the story was literally cut out from the game and the "wound" where it was cut was actually left in the game! The cut out chunk was then put up as DLC for several bucks.

After reading the front page news about MMO money drying up for "not quite triple-A" titles, I can't help but wonder how much of the reason is due to the demand of players to get more and more freebies and not supporting their favorite game's cash shop. Regardless of how you feel about what content ends up in the shop and when, the bottom line is, the more money you pay to play an MMO game, the more money will be reinvested into the game to make it better.

As a side note, the irony behind Cryptic's failed bid at charging for the new zone in champions and the extra races in STO is that they could have given them both out for free to all their players and still made money compared to the situation they are in now, with all the ill-will generated due to a few vocal players and with all the extra time all of their community managers and game masters have spent trying to deal with this issue.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2010 8:50pm by Maarg
#88 Feb 23 2010 at 10:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
Avatar
*****
11,081 posts
Quote:
Regardless of how you feel about what content ends up in the shop and when, the bottom line is, the more money you pay to play an MMO game, the more money will be reinvested into the game to make it better.


I really wish this was the case for XI, but there's no way in **** that if numbers are still at 500k users, at maybe $13.95 average, that $6,975,000 a month is being put back into the game at more than operation costs.

Granted, I do expect SE to take some of the money and put it elsewhere, but I can't help but wonder how much better off XI could have been, would be now, and in the future if they did more than just race the horse and then throw it back into the stable with some food and water until next run.
____________________________
Violence good. **** bad. Yay America.
#89 Feb 24 2010 at 12:03 AM Rating: Good
Seriha wrote:
Quote:
Regardless of how you feel about what content ends up in the shop and when, the bottom line is, the more money you pay to play an MMO game, the more money will be reinvested into the game to make it better.


I really wish this was the case for XI, but there's no way in **** that if numbers are still at 500k users, at maybe $13.95 average, that $6,975,000 a month is being put back into the game at more than operation costs.

Granted, I do expect SE to take some of the money and put it elsewhere, but I can't help but wonder how much better off XI could have been, would be now, and in the future if they did more than just race the horse and then throw it back into the stable with some food and water until next run.


"FFXI - Rode hard and put away wet."

Interesting...

Also an interesting note...Blizzard very recently announced the donation of $1.1 million to the Make-A-Wish Foundation...50% of the money they pulled in from the sale of Pandaren Monk vanity pets in WoW ($10 for the pet, $5 of which went to MaW). Sure, Blizzard made some coin from that. Far more than it cost for the artists to create the pet, that's for sure. They also did something good with a chunk of the money they pulled in. Even by today's inflated standards, a $1.1 million charitable donation is nothing to scoff at.

Obviously, that's not going to be the norm for most MMO studios. They're going to pocket the extra money they make from micro-transactions in the majority of cases. MMOs are cash cows, but somewhere along the line someone figured out that yes, people will infact fork out an extra few dollars here and there for in-game "merchandise". Smart developers have also realized that unless you're building the game around a F2P revenue model, there are certain areas that are simply taboo. Gear, in-game currency, combat related consumables...taboo. Bad mojo. Nobody likes feeling like the playing field is uneven and the only way to level it is to shunt money from other things towards virtual materialism.

At the same time that Blizzard released the Pandaren Monk vanity pet, they also released a Lil KT vanity pet. If you leave him beside any of the numerous level 1 critters you can find throughout the game, he'll zap it with a frostbolt and kill it. That pet is $10, too. And the day the Pandaren Monk and Lil KT were made available, they were all over the place. You couldn't go anywhere in a major city without running into someone who had at least one (if not both) of them. That's when I realized that the micro transactions didn't hurt me one bit. I still got to see them. I got to watch them in action. All $10 would have gotten me would be the ability to pull it out when I wanted to. Not worth it to me. Obviously worth it to others. More power to them.

Blizzard has been in the practice of giving out unique little non-game-breaking goodies for a long time now and I can't honestly say I've felt resentful for not having been given an opportunity to get a Murloc Marine pet or a polar bear mount with a stuffed Murloc sitting just behind its head waving a BlizzCon flag. They're neat...a little mirth never hurts, but that's not why I play. It's no different from mounts awarded to top arena PvPers or raiders clearing all of the encounters in a particular dungeon on hard/heroic modes. If I want it, the path to getting it is clearly laid out. If I don't want to go down that path, I go without. Nobody is going to turn me away from a group because I don't have a scale model of <insert major FFXIV protagonist here> in my character's personal residence or sparkly cosmetic gear.

Edited, Feb 23rd 2010 10:03pm by AureliusSir
#90 Feb 24 2010 at 2:41 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Yeah, Assassins Creed are one of the bad-guys for doing that, so is Resident Evil 5 for for their DLC (already on disk). If anyone needs to checked if any DLC they're thinking of buying may already be on their game disk, just check the file size, usually all you're getting is a code to unlock that feature.

But the simple fact that the klingons were so unremarkable makes them being chargable even worse, because you just can't change the fact that they wanted an extra dollar from as many people as possible, when it should have been all part of the release.

I'm not an enemy of cash shop items, but I just think STO should have held off on doing something like that. If FFXIV has fluff items or even an extra race (but it would have to be MUCH later on, well after release) that I would have to make a small payment for, I probably would. No I actually would. Because I'm a huge fan, but I would still feel... I dunno dirty lol

All in all its not how much, or whats for sale that bothers me, its simply the timing. The Klingons could have been in the game from the start since thats how they were originaly planned and they were obviously ready for the release of the game.

Also this

http://www.massively.com/2010/02/23/rumor-final-fantasy-xis-march-update-may-be-the-last-for-the-g/

Lets hopw its not going to be put out to pasture x
#91 Feb 24 2010 at 11:03 AM Rating: Good
akelah wrote:
I'm not an enemy of cash shop items, but I just think STO should have held off on doing something like that. If FFXIV has fluff items or even an extra race (but it would have to be MUCH later on, well after release) that I would have to make a small payment for, I probably would. No I actually would. Because I'm a huge fan, but I would still feel... I dunno dirty lol

All in all its not how much, or whats for sale that bothers me, its simply the timing. The Klingons could have been in the game from the start since thats how they were originaly planned and they were obviously ready for the release of the game.

Also this

http://www.massively.com/2010/02/23/rumor-final-fantasy-xis-march-update-may-be-the-last-for-the-g/

Lets hopw its not going to be put out to pasture x


I wonder if SE would offer any compensation as mentioned in that little blurb you leaked. An extra month or two of free time in FFXIV if you have an active FFXI account when the servers shut down? An e-mail greeting card with a taru clown and a caption that says, "{Take care.} {See you again!}"?

Personally, I have a hard time imagining that they'd shut FFXI down. Stop supporting it with content updates, maybe. But I would imagine there are people who are still running FFXI on PCs that can barely handle it and wouldn't be able to handle FFXIV. It wouldn't be just a retail box (even a discounted retail box) they'd have to buy if they wanted to continue in an SE MMO...new mobo, CPU, RAM and GPU can add up pretty quick even if you buy budget components.

SE said when they announced FFXIV that they planned to continue support for FFXI, but they didn't really say for how long. If they put a skeleton crew on FFXI servers for maintainance and shunt some devs every once in a while to add a bit of new content, history has shown us that dated MMOs can go on for years and years (o hai EQ!!). I kind of think that shutting down FFXI would be a mistake. Merge servers, sure. Pull the plug on it altogether? Not so much.
#92 Feb 25 2010 at 2:36 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
SE said when they announced FFXIV that they planned to continue support for FFXI, but they didn't really say for how long. If they put a skeleton crew on FFXI servers for maintainance and shunt some devs every once in a while to add a bit of new content, history has shown us that dated MMOs can go on for years and years (o hai EQ!!). I kind of think that shutting down FFXI would be a mistake. Merge servers, sure. Pull the plug on it altogether? Not so much.


Well there's also a rumour flying around that FFXI are closing down servers on FFXI to make space for FFXIV - which I can probably see and it wouldn't be a huge problem for the eight year old game. So many of the servers are under-populated, merging those servers with one another would make FFXI feel a lot less empty while also freeing up those servers for their new venture.

I can see FFXI going for a long time yet, and while the March update may be the last one that the team works on as a whole, you will have a few devs who love the game so much still that they may even roll out a few content expansions out in their free time, it may even be possible to mimic (to some extent) some of the stuff they end up doing for FFXIV (though on a much smaller and simplistic scale, graphic wise). Its certainly not unheard of for that to happen with an MMO.

Who knows, FFXI one day may even become a retro F2P with a SE cash-shop, even that would be preferable to shutting it down all together. The game is a work of art and deserves to be preserved for as long as possible.

Edited, Feb 25th 2010 3:36am by akelah

Edited, Feb 25th 2010 3:37am by akelah
#93 Feb 25 2010 at 2:57 AM Rating: Good
Sage
****
6,470 posts
Maarg wrote:
@Eske: read back a few posts to my first two walls of text. You will see that Sony gave practically zero free content patches in Everquest, but Blizzard gave 10 free content patches (which are as big as most game's expansions). 10/12 of Blizzard's expansions were free, so I'd call that an overabundance of free content. In both cases, large numbers of people were perfectly willing to pay $15 a month for the services they received, but one group had to pay $30 each for 16 expansions and one group had to pay $30 each for 2 expansions and got 10 for free.

If you really want to know my personal reason for my stance, it is because I am a software developer myself (medical billing software, not games), and there is NOTHING worse than spending 18 months developing code that you bust your *** writing, and are immensely proud of, only to be told by your bosses that "We're not going to charge the customer anything to receive the update that contained all the work you busted your *** doing. Oh and by the way, you won't be receiving a raise this year because we didn't make enough money from our customers."

I think what most people are getting at is that they don't like that the game only contains 90% of the actual content but that they feel they have to pay 100% of the price. I understand this completely! However, I would hate to think what would happen if they decided to raise the price of the product to include all of the (previously) extra paid content, which results in make me pay more for something I never wanted in the first place.


I figured that you had some personal familiarity with the subject, at least.

I can definitely see the frustration that you're talking about, but I just don't know that it universally applies. I feel that, considering the examples of small companies that have succeeded while still putting out free expansions, it's entirely possible to do without the charge, at least sometimes.

Now, like I said, I'm not against paid expansions at all. But I am against the clear cases of gouging player bases for money, like when a developer purposely withholds content from the game's release in order to charge for it later. Generally speaking, as long as the content justifies its cost, I'm okay with paying for it. Patches, in my opinion, should also sprinkle in some additional content, though I think that's just a good way to keep the player-base happy, and not necessarily requisite.

Show me company that struggles financially because they don't charge for expansions, and I bet I can show you a company that mismanaged its finances long beforehand.

Edited, Feb 25th 2010 4:00am by Eske
____________________________
Latest Articles:
Monaco: What's Yours is Mine Review

Follow me on Twitter!
#94 Feb 25 2010 at 5:05 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
**
633 posts
akelah wrote:
Just read this this morning and I had an awful image of FFXIV doing something exactly the same since SE have launched this new Crysta Currency thing.

http://www.massively.com/2010/02/02/star-trek-online-offers-two-new-races-in-online-store/#continued

STO has only launched this month and is carries with it a monthly sub as you probably already know. But now they've done this, I almost bought that game but cancelled when I saw that it was basically a heavilly instanced cluster of bubbles, rather than the expansive space, boldly going adventure they had their spin-doctors spouting.

I'm all for DLC and stores, bot THIS soon? If I was still buying this game I would be so angry with them. Pay all this money to play and be charged more for races that really should have been included from the bloody start. I've also got CO, which is currently broken due to the lag they caused in a not so patchy patch and I'm rather miffed about their recent announcement they are then charging for an expansion, which promises us content in which to level in from 37-40. Content that should be there from the get go since its a grind fest in one area since the only other area available for those levels is...wait for it...broken. Lagmuria is a black hole! People who logged out there can't get back in and are unable to access characters trapped there.

Cryptic/Atari for me are a shady company to start with, but I have to admit since SE announced the Crysta thing, I'm worried.

Are we going to be seeing, as well as a monthly sub, micro transaction stores to boot?


You forgot to mention that Cryptic revealed those Two races AFTER the game launch, even though they were supposed be in during the prerelease program. So tough luck if you wanted to roll those races from the get go, you would have to start over to use them. Was that intentional? **** right it was.

Cryptic sure as **** spent a lot of time implementing a DLC system into their account management. Unfortunately it seems they spent more time working on that than actual content.

There definitely is a means to offer a vast array of DLC at the players expense. However, those two races do not significantly alter gameplay at all.

See... that is where I think the line needs to be drawn. It is one thing to offer cosmetic changes, races or even pets as part of a micro-transaction model of revenue. It is an entirely different matter to offer Ships, Weapons and gameplay orientated content to those that are willing to spend the extra money. That is just absolutely asinine.

Paying to play a Federation Klingon race is Ok in my book. If you are just that hot and bothered about making a Worf look-a-like, go nuts. Paying for a uber Purple Deflector shield and going to town in PvP is not cool.

Square seems to be new to this entire method of pulling in extra dollars, but I would imagine that if they really did offer costly DLC that it would things that would not really effect gameplay or balance. For instance MH (Or FFXIV equivalent) items, bikinis, costumes etc etc. Well that is my hope at least. If I see any indication that there is a similar compliment of gear or content in DLC form that rivals or is even remotely similar to what hard working players have to obtain, I am walking in the other direction.

Edited, Feb 25th 2010 5:09am by patient
____________________________
"BSTito, ergo erat..." (I BST, therefore I was.) -Rennne Decarrtee, Mithran Philosopher
#95 Feb 25 2010 at 10:26 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
Two races AFTER the game launch


News of the payable races broke DURING headstart. They were ready at launch, for launch - but they wanted people to pay for them. It doesn't matter what it is or how much - the fact is they removed content from the finished product, a product everyone had paid for already, to sell again.
#96 Feb 25 2010 at 12:02 PM Rating: Good
akelah wrote:
Quote:
SE said when they announced FFXIV that they planned to continue support for FFXI, but they didn't really say for how long. If they put a skeleton crew on FFXI servers for maintainance and shunt some devs every once in a while to add a bit of new content, history has shown us that dated MMOs can go on for years and years (o hai EQ!!). I kind of think that shutting down FFXI would be a mistake. Merge servers, sure. Pull the plug on it altogether? Not so much.


Well there's also a rumour flying around that FFXI are closing down servers on FFXI to make space for FFXIV - which I can probably see and it wouldn't be a huge problem for the eight year old game. So many of the servers are under-populated, merging those servers with one another would make FFXI feel a lot less empty while also freeing up those servers for their new venture.


I don't expect the servers currently hosting FFXI are anywhere near modern standards. The only benefit I could see to merging servers in FFXI would be to preserve populations and to reduce maintenance and overhead costs, not shuffle resources to save on hardware for FFXIV. I would expect a substantial number of FFXI players will be canceling their subscription and moving on to FFXIV. Underpopulated servers now will be even worse at FFXIV launch. There's always the question of what to do with old hardware that has been taken out of service, but in terms of quality of service for FFXIV, newer hardware is virtually a must.
#97 Feb 25 2010 at 1:52 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
372 posts
Quote:
I don't expect the servers currently hosting FFXI are anywhere near modern standards. The only benefit I could see to merging servers in FFXI would be to preserve populations and to reduce maintenance and overhead costs, not shuffle resources to save on hardware for FFXIV. I would expect a substantial number of FFXI players will be canceling their subscription and moving on to FFXIV. Underpopulated servers now will be even worse at FFXIV launch. There's always the question of what to do with old hardware that has been taken out of service, but in terms of quality of service for FFXIV, newer hardware is virtually a must.


True, I'm a bit of a technophobe and have absolutely no idea how these things work, but I would imagine they would sell the no longer used/required equipment, either way its still money put towards what they've spent getting FFXIV up and running :D
#98 Feb 25 2010 at 3:39 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
419 posts
Free to Play subscriptions with real money purchases have really proven, for better or worse, wildly profitable. There's a reason why Allods thinks they can get away with their outrageous pricing scheme (even though I think they're going to overdo it, crash and burn). Fact is, free to play is here to stay, because it makes more money than subscriptions.

For non-AAA MMOs that is.

I fully don't expect any AAA MMO to go the subscription model WITH a store any time soon. WoW and its vanity items, as well as premium services, will be the closest thing we'll see for a while with AAA titles.

But you never know. Greed... it's one heck of a thing.

____________________________
Currently inactive blog, may go live again in the future:
http://ffxiv-hub.blogspot.com/
#99 Feb 26 2010 at 4:35 PM Rating: Decent
*
84 posts
I personally am in the same boat with SE's designers persona distaste for microtransactions.

I feel that the microtransaction/crysta model that they are going to be using here will be for non-vital aspects of the game that are cosmetic in nature. I'll be **** ****** though if they start offering some really awesome-looking clothing that you can only buy via microtransaction.

The most "awesome" stuff should be earned, not bought. Mundane things like ingredients, should be buyable however especially if you're too lazy to get off your **** and procure those ingredients yourself. :)
#100 Feb 26 2010 at 5:28 PM Rating: Default
Quote:
I think that within the next several years we're going to see a defined gap emerge between games that offer only trivial micro transactions and games that basically open the shop doors to anyone who has money to spend. I also expect that micro transactions on some level are here to stay in MMOs. Agree with the concept or not, it's a potentially huge money maker for game studios and game studios are still businesses at the end of the day. It's just a question of whether or not a particular studio respects their customers enough to limit the scope of those transactions so that Bob Frugal doesn't get left out of all of the endgame activities because he's not willing to spend a whack of cash to gear his character.


This.

I think all we can hope for is SE developers to put the fans in one hand and the money in the other and make the right decision.
Bottom line yes SE is a business thats goal is to make money.
The minute we are forced to make a critical decision between paying for potentially game play altering gear or refusing and as a repercussion don't get included in end game or mission related events because of it and the entire FFXIV fan base realizes it as a whole the community will fall apart and most (or so I would hope)) would leave.
____________________________
PS: Your Wonder Clomps and Fang Necklace at DRG75 are utter dogsh*t terrible. You've had an entire month and made no improvements in your gear.

Bsphil to Phantasydragon
#101 Mar 07 2010 at 12:01 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
*
73 posts
several things i'd like to comment on about Blizzard and WoW:

someone said Blizzard has a 'spine'. that's subjective, and i'd like to disagree a bit here, because over the course of the game's lifespan, they have been swayed many many times on issues pertaining to class balance by a community that was ofttimes more visceral than anything else. as is normal with any business, blizzard has more of a spine for money instead of personal feelings and standpoints and these two become quickly related. when you go cancel your subscription, you will find a drop-down box containing many possible reasons to explain your departure. one that is running a business would be inclined to agree with the people who are paying one's bills.

maarg, these 10 'free expansions' you are talking about do not exist. taking the Lich King expansion as an example, Ulduar, Coliseum, and finally Icecrown Citadel should not be considered 'free content'. why? the paid expansion itself already claims that you will be fighting the Lich King, as such .. areas like Icecrown Citadel aren't free content but a part of that expansion that was simply introduced at a later date rather than being available from the get-go. as for the other raids/areas, believe me.. if Naxxramas was the only raid available for a 40 dollar expansion pack, Blizzard would be fed to the hounds. these content patches are just dissected parts of the expansion pack that are introduced at a controlled rate to match with the general progression of the populace.
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 23 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (23)