Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
This Forum is Read Only

Subscription FeesFollow

#1 Oct 05 2012 at 6:36 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
I wanted to spread my opinion on the matter and hopefully many of you will see my point and spread the word. I don't want FFXIV to fail solely because the new mentality is that subscription fees for MMOs are no longer desirable by players. That being said here is my point:

If there is a game (or any other type of entertainment service you love) paying a monthly fee for it is not that bad especially when we're talking $12-$14 a month. The reality is that these games cost alot to produce and cost alot to maintain. If we want something that is good with regular content being delivered that has to come at a price. And folks,let's be real here, is $14 a month really going to break you if it is going toward something you want to do?

I spend $10 a month on netflix.
I buy a cup of coffee a day from Starbucks which ends up at about $90 a month.
I buy cable with hbo and showtime. Hbo I watch basically never unless there is a movie on that I've probably already seen.
I spend about $100 or more a month going out for drinks.
I spend about $150 a month going out to eat when I have food at home.

What is my point? My point is that I, like many if not all of you, spend my money on various crap each month that I don't need. So, if we are excited about a product should we let it fail simply because we refuse to pay for it? I can cut out 3 cups of Starbucks a month or I can skip going out to dinner once. I can avoid that 5th trip to the bar one night of the month or **** even just skip those last 3 drinks of a night I'm already there.

In other words, there are many many ways I can scrounge together $14 a month for a product I'm really excited about. The question is, can you?

Edited, Oct 5th 2012 8:38am by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#2 Oct 08 2012 at 5:55 PM Rating: Good
****
4,169 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
In other words, there are many many ways I can scrounge together $14 a month for a product I'm really excited about. The question is, can you?

Being a gamer on a budget, I think the clear logic is that people will make a choice on what they enjoy most. I would gladly scrounge an extra $14 to add another MMO subscription to the one I already have. That said, I would probably only do that for a few months at most before making a decision on which I enjoy most and narrow it down to that.

There may be people out there that have the time or money for multiple subscriptions and they'll make their decision based on that, but I think that many people stick to one or two and will choose their best options; the ones they enjoy the most.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#3 Oct 08 2012 at 8:52 PM Rating: Good
*
131 posts
Lol the reality is that if a game is not p2p, it is freemium or f2p with cash shop (which generally turns into p2w). These freemium and f2p games will run you much more than 15 bucks a month when you average it out for usually less quality because they are not making as much revenue as a p2p. P2P games are actually cheaper than any f2p or freemium... That being said you can play f2p games like allods and Forsaken World and never spend a dime and make it to endgame... the problem is that at endgame cash shop items are NEEDED for pve and pvp to compete so if you spend nothing your character is horribly gimped...

So yeah... I have no problem paying 15 bucks a month or less on a game and have EVERYTHING open to me from the get go.
#4 Oct 09 2012 at 1:25 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,169 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
Lol the reality is that if a game is not p2p, it is freemium or f2p with cash shop (which generally turns into p2w).

I disagree with this comment and now more than ever it's actually been trending the opposite way. Devs have discovered that people will pay for vanity items and that many of the same people are flat out against P2W. It's completely within the realm of possibility that developers can create content to unlock in a cash shop that does nothing more than enhance customization options and still generate enough cash flow to have frequent free content upgrades. As a matter of fact, I'd be willing to wager that this is probably a more lucrative business model; especially if you have a creative team working to make the paid content popular.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#5 Oct 09 2012 at 3:25 PM Rating: Decent
*
131 posts
Nooooo... in FFXIV's case, they spent SOO much money developing it that to hope for meager returns from vanity cash shop would probably destroy the game... They need to establish profits first before they can do such a thing. The ONLY game I have known to go with the fully f2p with vanity cash shop is AION. I wouldn't say that all dev's are finding this the best route and it was by NCsoft. A very well-known, rich company that could do such things. Not to mention they had Guild Wars 2 coming when they released f2p Aion and look how successful Guild wars 2 is... They are not hurting for money while Square Enix is kinda hurting with XIV. They making mad profits on XI, but are still continuing to develop XI. They are just in the hole on XIV and need to get out of it in a sure-fire way.

So I have to disagree with your statement. All games at the moment are f2p with pay to win cash shop, freemium (still costs a lot), pay to play, or Aion lol...
#6 Oct 09 2012 at 11:26 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
Avatar
**
676 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Banwawgwa wrote:
Lol the reality is that if a game is not p2p, it is freemium or f2p with cash shop (which generally turns into p2w).

I disagree with this comment and now more than ever it's actually been trending the opposite way. Devs have discovered that people will pay for vanity items and that many of the same people are flat out against P2W. It's completely within the realm of possibility that developers can create content to unlock in a cash shop that does nothing more than enhance customization options and still generate enough cash flow to have frequent free content upgrades. As a matter of fact, I'd be willing to wager that this is probably a more lucrative business model; especially if you have a creative team working to make the paid content popular.


I can't agree more. MMO's that are free to play with a cash shop do tend to make more money just because people don't realize how much money they are spending. It's only $2. It's only $4. It all adds up in the end. I had this opinion a couple days ago in electromagnets last thread on the same subject and I got karma bombed. Hopefully you fare better than I did.
____________________________
[ffxivsig]1789917[/ffxivsig]
#7 Oct 09 2012 at 11:57 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Sigh... A pay to win cash shop in a f2p game makes lots of profits... HOWEVER! Pure vanity cash shops will not get SE the returns they need to pay off XIV. If they had the game paid off to where revenue was purely profits... Yes a vanity cash shop and f2p model could be seen as a possibility. But at the moment such a model would put the game under... which we do not want.
#8 Oct 10 2012 at 12:40 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,169 posts
swisa wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
Banwawgwa wrote:
Lol the reality is that if a game is not p2p, it is freemium or f2p with cash shop (which generally turns into p2w).

I disagree with this comment and now more than ever it's actually been trending the opposite way. Devs have discovered that people will pay for vanity items and that many of the same people are flat out against P2W. It's completely within the realm of possibility that developers can create content to unlock in a cash shop that does nothing more than enhance customization options and still generate enough cash flow to have frequent free content upgrades. As a matter of fact, I'd be willing to wager that this is probably a more lucrative business model; especially if you have a creative team working to make the paid content popular.


I can't agree more. MMO's that are free to play with a cash shop do tend to make more money just because people don't realize how much money they are spending. It's only $2. It's only $4. It all adds up in the end. I had this opinion a couple days ago in electromagnets last thread on the same subject and I got karma bombed. Hopefully you fare better than I did.

Unfortunately, there are just people in these forums who see my name, disregard the content of my posts and spam the red arrow as fast as humanly possible.

Banwawgwa wrote:
HOWEVER! Pure vanity cash shops will not get SE the returns they need to pay off XIV. If they had the game paid off to where revenue was purely profits... Yes a vanity cash shop and f2p model could be seen as a possibility. But at the moment such a model would put the game under... which we do not want.

Seeing that the game cost SE tens of millions to develop just up to release(over 2 years ago), millions more to repair and re-release(then until ARR comes out) and millions more to develop future content and expansions that follow; I think just breaking even is a much more realistic goal. Consider the following...

If you pay for a product and it's bad you'll probably complain, possibly ask for a refund and almost certainly tell friends and family to avoid it. If you pay for a product and it's great you have no issues paying for it, you are likely to return for more of it and you'll probably tell friends and family.

If you are given something for free and it's bad then you'll probably just stop using it. You're less likely to complain because it cost you nothing and you might warn people about it but since it's free, what have they got to lose for trying it. If you are given something for free and it's great then you're more likely to rave about it to anyone who will listen. Not only that, but if it's an option many people will try to donate just based on the fact that they are getting something they value for nothing.

Take for example League of Legends. Now I know it's not for everyone and this isn't really a plug, but it does make the point quite nicely. I'm still new to the game and getting a feel for how it plays and which champions I like, but I've already made a purchase for RP, the currency they use in their cash shop. I didn't really have any specific plan on how to use the currency, but I made the purchase more as a donation in support of development. I really enjoy the game and I appreciate that it's a free service so even if I don't end up spending the RP, I feel like it was money well spent.

As to your point about F2P with cash shop 'putting the game under', you have to remember that XIV was buy to play for well over a year and the price was lower than it's now decade old predecessor. Poor development and support is what puts games under, not business models. Regardless of which business model they choose, SE needs to put out an offering that draws enough people to the game. F2P > B2P > P2P(in that order) have the best possibility of bringing new players to the game and keeping them there.


Edited, Oct 10th 2012 2:46am by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#9 Oct 10 2012 at 2:02 AM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Lol but that is false. If it is completely free with a vanity cash shop with PURELY optional junk... not many will partake. Why spend money? I came to this game cuz its free... Kind of mentality. I certainly would not pay for a stupid hat that does nothing but look silly... Or a fancy arm chair for my in game house when I can get something else in the game for free.

If they released freemium model it would be better... Where you can play a good amount for free but have to purchase some content and stuff as you level up. But Vanity shop just is not a good option for SE lol... "many people will try to donate just based on the fact they are getting something they value for nothing." Umm... nooo... They are getting something they value for NOTHING! They are not going to pay something then... That is how people's minds in general work. Plain and simple economics.
#10 Oct 10 2012 at 4:16 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
***
1,692 posts
If any of you play Gw2 you will of probably recieved the emails asking people to spend money in the cash shop, it's hard to convince people to spend money when they don't have to.. So unless there are things in the cash shop they have to buy (pay to win) people just won't do it.
#11 Oct 10 2012 at 4:25 AM Rating: Good
****
4,169 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
Lol but that is false. If it is completely free with a vanity cash shop with PURELY optional junk... not many will partake. Why spend money?

This question has several answers I can think of, a few I probably can't and they're all valid reasons. I'll give you an example:

I bought a soundtrack for XI that came with an in-game item. Personally, I got it because I love the music and I honestly would have made the purchase regardless of the in-game item, but I do know people who got it because they wanted the item and didn't care about the music. There are also people who are just completionists and want to have every vanity item.

I can't for the life of me understand why people want to buy yogurt without fruit, but if I was in the business of selling yogurt it would be stupid of me not to offer it plain because the market exists. Bottom line.

Banwawgwa wrote:
"many people will try to donate just based on the fact they are getting something they value for nothing." Umm... nooo... They are getting something they value for NOTHING! They are not going to pay something then... That is how people's minds in general work. Plain and simple economics.

Actually no Banwawgwa, it's marketing. Offering a service for free greatly increases the amount of prospective customers you might have. This is the reason why games have demos and free trials. The model works because by offering part of the service for free, you can market to an exponentially larger number people. If you know how people's minds work then you can understand that 'no-risk' means more people will try something.

If you charge $50 for a game then maybe 1/20 people will try it because of the cost associated just with finding out if they will like it. It's possible that all 20 people would have spent the $50 if they knew in advance it was something they would use so you're potentially losing out on business. On the other hand, if you make part of your service free then all 20 people can at least try it out.

If the product is good then chances are you'll get more business, which leads to more revenue, which leads to having more money to invest in future content, which leads to happy gamers, which leads to more business, which leads to more revenue... I see a pattern here Smiley: sly
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#12 Oct 10 2012 at 9:05 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
852 posts
I am not a gamer on a budget. I can subscribe to as many sub-based MMOs as I want to (Not that I would do more than one based on time-constraints alone), so that means the decision on where I choose to spend my time and money is made on the quality of the content of the game, its lore, its world. The polish on the mechanics. How well they are thought out.

This was the main reason I cancelled my CE after open beta, and only played one month after I did decide to buy the game in Jan '11. I have absolutely no issue with SE insisting this be a subscription-based game. But if they don't have the content and polish to command the sub in this market, then of course, no one is going to pay, least of all me.
____________________________
[ffxivsig]1807397[/ffxivsig]
#13 Oct 10 2012 at 9:39 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
Well said. I don't think that people insisting on F2P from the start is unfair to square-enix. But you're right, if SE produces FFXIV 1.0 - 2. Then they will have a very tough time getting people to subscribe and will need to rethink that idea.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#14 Oct 10 2012 at 2:57 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
RAHRAH BLAH FIlthMcNasty you just do not understand how the humans operate. Vanity cash shops... you are looking at the 1-5 out of every 1000 players actually spending decent chunks of change int he CS... NOT ENOUGH! Let us look at a real world example

"Excuse me sir, would you like a fresh baked cookie? You can have it for free. Or you can pay 5 bucks so I can make a little profit."

Can I get a show of hands of how many would take the cookie for free? (Everyone raises hand but FilthMcNasty). Are you finally understanding Filth? (FFXIV is the cookie just to clarify...)

PEOPLE WILL NOT PAY FOR WHAT THEY CAN HAVE FOR FREE! There is no point in buying a dumb new hat when it offers no boosts to stats or anything. If it does then the cash shop would be pay to win and you would no longer have any arguments Filth. Like I said, Aion is the ONLY game to do the everything free and vanity cash shop... So I don't know where you get the idea that All games will benefit from this model...

Yes, people will use a stupid vanity cash shop... But not many. It is a fact you must accept. Vanity items are pointless and most people would ONLY partake when they felt like splurging a bit which would be RARELY! You probably think lots of people buy lots of things from cash shops because you see tons of people with a cash shop item in games you play. Most likely that is the only cash shop item they have or they have just a tiny handful because they decided to go "eh, what the heck" and splurge on it. Everyone buying 1 or 2 things will still have the game crash and burn fast.

Vanity cash shop = horrendous idea for FFXIV plain and simple.

Edited, Oct 10th 2012 4:59pm by Banwawgwa
#15 Oct 10 2012 at 3:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Sage
**
534 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
RAHRAH BLAH FIlthMcNasty you just do not understand how the humans operate. Vanity cash shops... you are looking at the 1-5 out of every 1000 players actually spending decent chunks of change int he CS... NOT ENOUGH! Let us look at a real world example

"Excuse me sir, would you like a fresh baked cookie? You can have it for free. Or you can pay 5 bucks so I can make a little profit."

Can I get a show of hands of how many would take the cookie for free? (Everyone raises hand but FilthMcNasty). Are you finally understanding Filth? (FFXIV is the cookie just to clarify...)

PEOPLE WILL NOT PAY FOR WHAT THEY CAN HAVE FOR FREE! There is no point in buying a dumb new hat when it offers no boosts to stats or anything. If it does then the cash shop would be pay to win and you would no longer have any arguments Filth. Like I said, Aion is the ONLY game to do the everything free and vanity cash shop... So I don't know where you get the idea that All games will benefit from this model...

Yes, people will use a stupid vanity cash shop... But not many. It is a fact you must accept. Vanity items are pointless and most people would ONLY partake when they felt like splurging a bit which would be RARELY! You probably think lots of people buy lots of things from cash shops because you see tons of people with a cash shop item in games you play. Most likely that is the only cash shop item they have or they have just a tiny handful because they decided to go "eh, what the heck" and splurge on it. Everyone buying 1 or 2 things will still have the game crash and burn fast.

Vanity cash shop = horrendous idea for FFXIV plain and simple.

Edited, Oct 10th 2012 4:59pm by Banwawgwa


FF RR will be F2P someday and will have a vanity shop. Not at the release date....but later on.

Feel free to educate yourself. I think this guy knows a little about the subject.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/08/10/guild-wars-2-lead-producer-whiteside-believes-subscription-mmo-model-offers-huge-barrier-to-entry/
____________________________
Amos Fin - Ultros

#16 Oct 10 2012 at 3:35 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
Simool wrote:


FF RR will be F2P someday and will have a vanity shop. Not at the release date....but later on.

Feel free to educate yourself. I think this guy knows a little about the subject.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngaudiosi/2012/08/10/guild-wars-2-lead-producer-whiteside-believes-subscription-mmo-model-offers-huge-barrier-to-entry/


WoW did a subscription model successfully and has continued to do so for near a decade with still the largest population of players of any MMO using any model be it free to play, pay to play, cash shop , etc. All this "subcription models are barriers to entry" is a bogus claim. It is only a barrier to entry of a bad game.

Why do people not want to pay for Guild wars? or SWTOR? or LOTRO? Because they offer nothing unique. They are all sandbox WoW clones with a different franchise attached to it.

"How would you like to quest (run to the green dot on the map and press enter) today Jim? In the Star wars world? The froto world? the matrix!?". No matter which one you play you are playing the same exact thing with a different skin and text dialogue. Absolutely nothing sets them apart.

...THAT is why people are sick of paying for MMOs. I might love cookies. But after I pay for them for several months you eventually they are all the same.

Here's to hoping FFXIV 2.0 is a piece of cake :)

Edited, Oct 10th 2012 5:38pm by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#17 Oct 10 2012 at 6:25 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,169 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
"Excuse me sir, would you like a fresh baked cookie? You can have it for free. Or you can pay 5 bucks so I can make a little profit."

Can I get a show of hands of how many would take the cookie for free? (Everyone raises hand but FilthMcNasty). Are you finally understanding Filth? (FFXIV is the cookie just to clarify...)

Pay attention Banwawgwa, I'm going to build on your example just to show you how easy the point that you're missing is to grasp.

Ok, so lets say there are two tables set up in a market(the MMO market). One table run by SE(XIV) and the other run by Riot(LoL).

At the SE table they have sugar cookies for 5 bucks. At the Riot table they are giving away free sugar cookies. Anyone and everyone is going to stop at the Riot table first and try their cookie because it's free. Nothing to lose and if they don't like it and feel that they must have cookies they could easily move to the SE table and pay for them. Are you with me so far? Good.

Now free sugar cookies are great, I think we can all agree. The thing is that Riot also has a slew of other cookies at their table. Peanut butter cookies, chocolate chip cookies, oatmeal raisin cookies; you name it. All of these other (vanity) cookies cost money just like SE's cookies. If people enjoyed Riot's free cookies, they're much more likely to shell out money for their premium cookies then they are to walk over to the SE table and pay for a cookie that they haven't sampled.

Banwawgwa wrote:
PEOPLE WILL NOT PAY FOR WHAT THEY CAN HAVE FOR FREE!

By this standard, no one would pay for any game subscription because some companies offer them for free. Yet WoW still has over 10 million customers paying for service. XI has over 100k paid subs. Eve Online probably has 100k subs.

People will pay for service (even when other services are free) when they want some variety. If spaghetti were free, people would still pay for other foods because no one wants to eat spaghetti every meal.

We will have to agree to disagree on the business model for XIV. For whatever reason, even though I think you can follow along with the example above, you don't want a F2P model. I get it. You cannot say, however, that it will destroy the game as it clearly works for several other MMOs; all of which are more popular and generate more revenue than XIV.

I understand that it is you personal opinion that vanity items are crap, but don't be so ignorant as to think that everyone agrees with you. Anyone with an open mind and the ability to make a decision about what they do and don't like can see that.
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#18 Oct 10 2012 at 10:13 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,202 posts
SE problem will arise from the different prices, legacy players will pay half the price, while the majority of the player base(If ARR is successful) will have to pay full price for a product that in the end will be carried on their shoulders, and given how much people like to complain about nothing, considering different payment plans is not nothing well you see where i am going with this.

Also people will pay as long as the game is fun and offers content.
____________________________
MUTED
#19electromagnet83, Posted: Oct 11 2012 at 9:55 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) I agree with your post but people should try to avoid statements like this. Do you have access to SE's accounting books? Or Blizzard's? You have no way of knowing how much "revenue" is generated by an MMO. You are basing that solely on whether the MMO continues to exist or not. And even if one generates more "revenue" than another that does not mean it generates more "profit."
#20 Oct 11 2012 at 11:42 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,169 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:


.... that it will destroy the game as it clearly works for several other MMOs; all of which are more popular and generate more revenue than XIV.....



I agree with your post but people should try to avoid statements like this. Do you have access to SE's accounting books? Or Blizzard's? You have no way of knowing how much "revenue" is generated by an MMO. You are basing that solely on whether the MMO continues to exist or not. And even if one generates more "revenue" than another that does not mean it generates more "profit."


I'm not an accountant for SE, no. Isn't really necessary though. There had been people who were parsing data to find out how many people were playing XIV at various points over the past few years. Even with an enormously generous estimate, if you multiplied the total active characters(which is likely higher than total subscribers due to mules, alternate characters, ect.) and multiplied this number by the subscription fee, the total doesn't even come close to the earnings of other games; even when you are considering this figure without operational costs like development, server upkeep, ect.

That's beside the point though. All I am trying to say here is that F2P doesn't doom games to failure. Ban doesn't like the idea of it and he or she obviously doesn't care for vanity items. That doesn't remove the possibility for the game not only to survive, but to thrive. Jus' sayin'

FYI companies like SE release reports on their earnings and they're made public. You can google 'Square Enix Holdings' and find most of, if not all of the information needed.

Disclaimer: Do so at your own risk as it may cause you to spiral into a deep depression Smiley: frown
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#21 Oct 11 2012 at 11:48 AM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
FilthMcNasty.... wtf... You're argument is completely invalid. You cannot compare LoL with FFXIV. They are two horrendously different games belonging to two horrendously DIFFERENT genres of gaming.... Therefore its more like Riot table you can have one free sugar cookie ONLY, or at XIV table you can buy a batch of 12 for 5 bucks... No one is necessarily better than the other... it depends if you just want the one cookie or more than one.

And my point of people will not pay for what they can get for free... Your argument against that is just stupid as well. Is there a free copy of XIV out there? I did not know another gaming company stole it and let you play it for free... Do you understand? XIV is the ONLY FFXIV game out there... Therefore no one can play it for free and if people enjoy it and want to play they HAVE to pay for it and they will be glad to do so.

Sigh...


And not saying F2P would destroy it... I just think f2p with nothing in the cash shop WORTH buying (i.e. all vanity crap) WOULD destroy the game because the game does not have many people playing, and of those that play it is most likely the case that not many will partake.

Edited, Oct 11th 2012 1:51pm by Banwawgwa
#22 Oct 11 2012 at 12:10 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:

FYI companies like SE release reports on their earnings and they're made public. You can google 'Square Enix Holdings' and find most of, if not all of the information needed.

Disclaimer: Do so at your own risk as it may cause you to spiral into a deep depression Smiley: frown


Good post and I think you're right. The F2P won't necessarily doom the game. I personally don't care for vanity items however and as someone pointed out earlier, paying for items that improve stats would be unfair, especially in a PVP arena. I think Square's entire approach to the MMO genre is much different than other companies however. It's not all about getting in and raping the system through 50 levels and getting the cool gear (even though that happens). They try to make an engaging and persistent online STORY that continues to unfold. Doing so requires an insane amount of labor costs. I don't feel a F2P model would really work at first because whereas other MMOs deliver new "quests" and Level caps, Square's aim is to deliver new content, rich with artistically developed CGI cutscenes like the offline counterparts.

In short, I think their goal is too ambitious to work with a free 2 play model. Unless they want to let people gamble with real money at the Golden Saucer ;)
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#23 Oct 11 2012 at 6:12 PM Rating: Good
****
4,169 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
FilthMcNasty.... wtf... You're argument is completely invalid. You cannot compare LoL with FFXIV. They are two horrendously different games belonging to two horrendously DIFFERENT genres of gaming....

It doesn't matter that they're different types of games. They are both in business to make a profit and they both serve the same purpose, which is to entertain people. B2P, F2P or P2P could easily be used for nearly any game these days. I know what they say about 'apples to oranges' but this comparison is completely within reason, especially when all you're talking about is how to market fruit to sell. I could have easily used a F2P MMORPG, but it makes the same valid point that you fail to comprehend.

I can't continue this discussion with you anymore. I've made my points to you and you're just not willing to accept them purely because that would conflict with your own opinion. The silly thing is, you're willing to pay a monthly fee for content. The difference between you and people who would rather pay to unlock the same content as they go is far too subtle to make a big deal out of and really isn't worth being bashed to try and make you understand. Thanks for playing though.

electromagnet83 wrote:
I personally don't care for vanity items however and as someone pointed out earlier, paying for items that improve stats would be unfair, especially in a PVP arena.

I agree 100%, but that's why I specified 'vanity' items. These items offer only cosmetic changes or aesthetic appeal. No stat boost, exp boost 'pay-to-win' PVP items included.

electromagnet83 wrote:
Doing so requires an insane amount of labor costs. I don't feel a F2P model would really work at first because whereas other MMOs deliver new "quests" and Level caps, Square's aim is to deliver new content, rich with artistically developed CGI cutscenes like the offline counterparts.

Here is where you lose me. I'm with you on the whole 'rich content and innovative and engaging gameplay' thing, but that would still be the goal regardless of the business model. You want customers for your business so you strive to make a product that resonates. I honestly don't think much would change if you went from accepting money on a monthly basis vs selling some sort of in-game currency people could use to turn their subligar into a pretty pink tutu or buy some dyes to paint their chocobo purple.

Honestly, I think you'd have to show that somehow this sort of customization would detract from players experience with shiny cutscenes or epic quest lines. I really can't see it.


Edited, Oct 11th 2012 8:15pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#24 Oct 11 2012 at 8:12 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
No no no no no Filth... I pointed out that they are different games for a reason. You overlook my arguments completely then give some bogus one. Let me explain. You cannot use LoL and XIV for your example because they are two different games catering to two different audiences. Just because LoL is free does not mean I'll ever play it. It looks horrible. I will gladly pay for XIV than play LoL. Do you understand!?! They target two different audiences so what model each are using is irrelevant... its if they can attract THEIR OWN SEPARATE AUDIENCES!

Goodness... You should pay attention to what you are reading.
#25 Oct 11 2012 at 8:53 PM Rating: Good
****
4,169 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
No no no no no Filth... I pointed out that they are different games for a reason. You overlook my arguments completely then give some bogus one. Let me explain. You cannot use LoL and XIV for your example because they are two different games catering to two different audiences.


You should take your own advice. They're both games created by companies in business to make money. The subject of this thread, 'subscription fees', relates to a business model. This model is independent of what type of game we're talking about. Like I said, I could have used another free MMO that is similar to XIV as an example. The fact is that it doesn't matter.

The underlying question is "Will a specific business model be detrimental to the success of a game?". You can't see that I guess. Not going to continue to try and 'splain it to you Lucy. Perhaps someone else will shed light.


Edited, Oct 11th 2012 10:54pm by FilthMcNasty
____________________________
Rinsui wrote:
Only hips + boobs all day and hips + boobs all over my icecream

HaibaneRenmei wrote:
30 bucks is almost free

cocodojo wrote:
Its personal preference and all, but yes we need to educate WoW players that this is OUR game, these are Characters and not Toons. Time to beat that into them one at a time.
#26 Oct 12 2012 at 1:04 AM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Well I tried telling you that f2p with cash shop doesn't necessarily mean doom... But perhaps vanity cash shop does. I like LotRO cash shop. Need it to buy certain quest packs, skirmishes, monster classes, convenience items (all swift travels, cosmetics, fancy mounts, speed up traits, etc...) They are by no means items that make any character "better" than any other... they just speed up leveling process. These items are actually WORTH a buy because they give a benefit but are not needed. But since they offer something useful they will be bought and they ARE! A crap vanity only thing... with low population of XIV... It is a huge gamble that is not worth the risk. You can only HOPE that people will buy it lol... but in reality they probably WON'T! but again you keep disregarding all my arguments, so what can I do? I tried.

And when comparing a f2p cash shop game with XIV sub model... You also need to look at the quality of the game. The world, the graphics, the content available. All straight f2p games will cower in comparison to XIV or any p2p... All previously p2p games now with cash shop can actually stand ground against it. But like I said, the ONLY game to do pure vanity is Aion... so idk why you think the fact that that is successful is the end all be all of proof. All other p2p now f2p have the LotRO model and they have all boosted their numbers from it too. LotRO model would be best for XIV, not vanity shop. END OF STORY! You will probably disregard everything I say in this though.
#27 Oct 12 2012 at 6:28 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
My point regarding the cutscenes was that if Square wants to achieve their goal of delivering substantial "content" it costs ALOT more money to upkeep than simply adding in new quests and raising the level cap.

Any MMO maker can run a pretty slim staff if new content consists of adding in new text dialogue for a slew of missions or quests that involve going from point A to B , fighting something, and returning for your reward. But to do that while also creating entirely new "offline" type content such as cutscenes with voiceovers and whatnot, you're looking at a much higher bill. They have to pay for that content somehow. And I don't necessarily think F2P would be able to cover it.

...again, I am no financial accountant but that is how I see it.

Edit: And before you ask "why do we need cutscenes in an MMO?" I would answer that, for most non-mmo players (who Square wants to attrack) the lack of rich offline-type storylines and cinematic driven advancement is a reason to avoid MMOs in the first place. I respect Square's attempt to bring that story-rich content to the online market. It may not be loved by all hardcore MMO players, but I feel if done right they might attract all the FF fans, many MMO fans, and players who have not currently tried either.

Edited, Oct 12th 2012 8:34am by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#28 Oct 12 2012 at 6:59 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
30 posts
I agree wholeheartedly with a lot of what electromagnet83 has said. I've supported FFXI up to 2010 and FFXIV since early beta and dived into GW2 a couple of days after it launched. While GW2 is a great game I enjoyed playing that has a lot of high points its novelty however ran out for me in about two weeks after I started playing and I actually found myself going back to play FFXIV more. Perhaps its because I am contributing to it per month that increases my attachment to it. Whereas with GW2 my logic upon paying the cost of entry is to stay within that free-to-play scenario. Some interesting discussion is going back and forwards with some valid points on both sides, but I think when everything is said and done what really drives people to play a game is if they are getting something out of it. Everyone has their own threshold to what they are willing to pay to satisfy their entertainment need.
____________________________
Striving to help the world ~ One N/PC at a time.
#29 Oct 12 2012 at 7:04 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
My brother tried to get me to play Guild Wars once, and I gave GW2 a try. In both cases I exclaimed "they should call this game 'the green dot'" because it seemed like the majority of what I was doing was:

Press enter on target, press enter to accept quest, look on map to find green dot, run to it, press enter a few times, run back to quest npc, collect loot. Rinse and repeat over and over again.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#30 Oct 13 2012 at 1:13 PM Rating: Decent
24 posts
I don't think I will ever understand the mindset of some current mmo players. How can one expect a game company to spend millions of dollars and countless hours creating a top notch mmo then give out the software for free and allow players to play without ever being required to give the company a dime? Video game development is not cheap and neither is maintaining servers. Do people honestly expect companies to create great games, keep servers up, and continue to create content all for them to play 100% free?
#31 Oct 13 2012 at 3:10 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
People will pay a subscription fee if the mmo is top quality and it offers loads of content that suits their taste. The enigma is that most mmos launch at low to mediocre quality or low on content in one or more areas. The argument about f2p, b2p, free trials, etc not being appealing to on the fence purchasers is ridiculous. People are more willing to spend when the cost of entry is lower to dampen the effects of possible buyers remorse.

Can p2p be succesful? Yes, WoW and other mmos prove it can be done. But that's not the debate going on now. The debate is if p2p is offering higher quality or more content versus the ftp or b2p market? Do you see p2p getting metascores of 9 plus or offering two times more content than ftp or b2p? I would be inclined to say no. Online servers are expensive, but not as much as people think. Otherwise b2p with vanity shops wouldn't be able to be sustained. I suppose that they make up alot of cost through full priced expansions. But don't p2p usually charge that as well?

If the subscription made right like its supposed to. Sub fee= more & higher quality content. WoW should have 20 expansions by now no? I want XIV to be successful no matter what the model is. But if it goes the p2p route, it better back that or it's doomed to fail or squabble for scraps out of the gate.
#32 Oct 13 2012 at 6:40 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,825 posts
Sandpark, you can't use WoW as an example. It launched after XI and (quite obviously) has a much larger player base which is locked into the experience. You have to look at more recent MMO's, Vaanguard, WAR, LOTRO, SWO, DCUO, etc... IMO these games only have one fault, they didn't lock in the player base fast enough. There's nothing wrong with the subscription model, you just have to keep people engaged long wnough that they form bonds that make it hard for them to sever ties with the game.

F2P games are usually what I use for my second MMO, something I jump into when my friends aren't on in my paid one. There's nothing wrong with them, I just generally feel that the box copy games with subs tend to give me a bit more of the experience I want. I don't have a financial obligation to spend time in those worlds either, so I tend not to get as involved in the social aspects of those games.
____________________________
FFXI:Sylph - Perrin 75 Hume THF; Retired (At least from my use any way)
EVE Online:ScraperX; Retired
WAR:IronClaw- Peryn SW;SkullThrone- Grymloc BO; Retired


#33 Oct 13 2012 at 8:47 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
972 posts
Perrin wrote:
Sandpark, you can't use WoW as an example. It launched after XI and (quite obviously) has a much larger player base which is locked into the experience. You have to look at more recent MMO's, Vaanguard, WAR, LOTRO, SWO, DCUO, etc... IMO these games only have one fault, they didn't lock in the player base fast enough. There's nothing wrong with the subscription model, you just have to keep people engaged long wnough that they form bonds that make it hard for them to sever ties with the game.

F2P games are usually what I use for my second MMO, something I jump into when my friends aren't on in my paid one. There's nothing wrong with them, I just generally feel that the box copy games with subs tend to give me a bit more of the experience I want. I don't have a financial obligation to spend time in those worlds either, so I tend not to get as involved in the social aspects of those games.

But the not locking in players fast is what I eluded to. This is usually due to mediocre quality or low content in a facet of the game. I can't remember be certain but I believe TOR & DCUO had good quality/fast leveling but low content endgame. I understand your feelings on becoming more invested in something when you spend money or time in it though. That's logical and why a p2p game has to get things right, even more so than f2p or b2p.
More money doesn't always equal better quality in the entertainment business though. Preference exist only after spending enough time to grow comfortable. If you were gonna purchase 1 of 2 plane tickets to Buenos Aires & they offer almost the same experience. Would you choose the more expensive option even though you knew the trip would be very similar & not knowing if the trip will suck until your on the plane in flight?

The average gamer complains about dlc in console games. If subscription became required to play games online on a per game basis, gamers would be very conscientious about buying a box full price. It's not that ten to 15 bucks is alot, cause it's not. It's the fact that those funds add onto the already monthly charges people have. Some people can afford it but some cannot. I think the majority can barely afford it when taking other costs into effect. This is why quality & content must be paramount. Remember the ps3 launch. It was backward compatible and had a blu ray player. It didn't sell like hotcakes because while it offered quality. That quality wasn't large enough over the wii or 360 to justify that cost to the masses.
#34 Oct 14 2012 at 6:17 AM Rating: Decent
5 posts
Okay. Hopefully this can be worth the read.


While I can understand the fundamental aspects of a subscription model [- the philosophy of getting what you pay for, along with content updates and the appropriate 'AAA Quality Level' aspect about paying per month for a video game -] the times are changing. I used to be a hardcore flag bearer of keeping the monthly sub in MMO's. Not anymore.

Back in the day, there wasn't really that much of a choice between what kind of MMO's you would of liked to play. There were games like UO, Ragnarok, EQ I, FFXI, SWG, and that was about it. Each game only had about 200-500k people subbed at a time. MMO's were a lot more hardcore and focused on a much more narrow demographic then they are now.

The thing was, back then, it was considered a massive undertaking to join and play a MMO. It was less like a gaming habit, or a genre preference, and more like an entire hobby all together different from normal video gaming. I knew a guy all throughout grade school that played FFXI every single night, grew up around very close online friends revolving around that game, and genuinely met his girlfriend there, whom he is now married and happily living with her under one home. I knew another friend who spent his entire grade school years playing SWG, and formed a very close bond with his server, and his friends, and accumulated hours upon hours upon impossible hours of 'stuff'.

When you joined a MMO in the last generation, it was like making one **** of a commitment. Sure, you were expected to pay per month, but back then, that was a big deal. It was a BIG deal to pay for playing a game, and since there was pretty much one, or, at the highest, two, kinds of games that would target the audience you specifically belong in, that little choice basiclly nudged you into a certain game, and you played that game for many, many years, therefore experiencing true fulfillment, proudly investing your money into a world you believe in, being far worth it considering your experiences playing the game.

Ten years later, things are different. The incredible surge of MMO's on the market, and the incredible amounts of failure, and overall controversial moves made by developers, publishers, investors, and even consumers, have changed the landscape. We now have a huge plethora of choices to make regarding what MMO we would like to invest our time in. This, along with the insane amount of failures experienced in launches, cliches formed in the western/eastern markets (Hotbars vs. Grinding) , and the perhaps too successful World of Warcraft, have basically imploded the MMO machine into a clingy mess of too much, and never good enough.

Nowadays, every gamer is beginning to get their hands on MMO's. MMO's are becoming less of a lifestyle, and more of a genre choice, just like FPS's, just like single player RPG's. In which there are many to choose from, and a large, diverse community with different interests and tastes. The problem now lies in the idea of

1.) Trying different games... and

2.) Sticking to games that interest you.


Most of the time when I play MMO's, I want to play more then one. FFXIV for the environment, story, and community. DAoC or Darkfall for PVP. GW2 for the dynamic events and WvWvW, etc. And usually, it is also much, much harder to find a great community that I belong in. It is unlike the yesteryears because unlike the yesteryears where we adapted to the games we played because we realisticlly had little choice in the matter, nowadays, what a MMO usually lacks, or doesn't have, or doesn't have in a way that suits your interests, usually another MMO has what the other one lacks.

And the reason why I left all of those games except for GW2 is because GW2 is the only game on that list where I don't have to pay a sub fee for. Every other game, I would play, then stop playing, then feel guilty about not playing because I was paying for it and therefore creating more stress/pressure for myself that I really didn't need more of.

So now, let's talk about me. I'm the type of guy that is looking for the MMO that has all of my tastes all wrapped up in one sweet looking package. If I could take GW2's sidequest and WvWvW, Darkfall's hardcore looting system, give it the visuals, tastes, and appeal of FFXIV, and TOR's main quest storytelling, and blend that all into one game, THAT, to me, would be a MMO to pay $15 for in 2012. A time period in which we are flooded with choices and quite literally spoiled to death with them.

Since no MMO's have done like what SWG have done for me in the past (and what most MMO's did for people ten years ago) , which is, allow complete fulfillment in being part of the world and knowing people within the world and feeling like the experiences playing there would amount to $1500 a month, not just $15, I simply cannot, and do not, want to pay $15 a month for a MMO I will play for a month, then not touch for a month, then go back for another week, and not touch it for a week.

I switch back and forth between MMO's now, and sometimes even play two/three at once, because I like the pvp from 'x', and the pve from 'y', and the art style from 'z', and the world from etc. ...

I am not going to pay.. $15, $30, $45.. ish.. not to mention the $60 retail price for buying the game in the first place (which by the way, GW2's f2p system isn't truely f2p, as base game costs $60 and it isn't 'free to download').


The time of picking one system and completely committing yourself to it is over. Perhaps the last remannt of that fanbase can be found in UO, the first EQ, and, perhaps... FFXI. We are now living in an era where people can no longer accept paying a monthly fee for a game, and it's starting to show, in the failure of AoC, TOR, Aion, TERA, Rift, etc to keep healthy numbers. Especially TORtanic, which was a real wake-up call for all devs. One the main reasons of their failure was the sub fee. People are even starting to shy away from the big, hairy, mean, scary, $60 game, going for the $10, $20, $30 Steam sales, and the Indy Games instead. Games like Mount and Blade, a $30 game, gave me much more fulfilling experiences then the $60 Battlefield 3.


Having a sub fee will hurt more then help FFXIV. It is no longer 2003, nor is it 2007. Plain and simple, FFXIV having a sub fee scares me. I am afraid they will scare off a bunch of potential customers because it will be a sign of the times that Japan is living up to their stereotype of not evolving.

And that's a huge concern coming from somebody who cares. Now being a full time college student, I will have to seriously consider whether or not this game will truly be worth my $15.

And I wish I didn't have to make that choice.
#35 Oct 14 2012 at 9:44 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
If you're into PVP , you should go buy street fighter. Let's stop attacking MMO game makers for wanting to charge a monthly fee for the product and instead why don't we focus on the real crooks out there?


EA, now makes it where you basically cannot buy or sell any of their used games. I accidentally registered my legit purchased copy of Battlefield 3 under my brother's Origin account login. Guess what? I have to play as him for the rest of my life because that registration code can never be used again. EA's support answer when I called? "Buy another copy."

MMO makers have a right to charge a monthly fee. It's freaking expensive to make and maintain. Period. Companies like EA are simply being greedy and trying to combat used game sales which stemmed from their repetitive charging of $59.99 a year to get the newest Madden NFL game with nothing more than updated stats.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#36 Oct 14 2012 at 1:14 PM Rating: Default
5 posts
electromagnet83 wrote:
If you're into PVP , you should go buy street fighter. Let's stop attacking MMO game makers for wanting to charge a monthly fee for the product and instead why don't we focus on the real crooks out there?


I was expecting an intellectual response. Instead I get a Street Fighter reference which is lol-worthy (I'm more of a DOA/Tekken guy?) and a change of the subject. Along with the assumption that I am attacking game developers. You really smell like a FF fanboy now.

Moving on from that, we all know EA is evil but 'evilness' is not the issue. It's adapting to the changing factor of consumer demand. I'm not attacking Squeenix for using a sub model. I'm, however, saying their rate of failure is much more significant if they do so.

Don't convince yourself into thinking everyone who plays MMO's have the same opinion as you about PVP (I can say right now, you are the extreme minority) or sub fees. **** if Squeenix wants to charge a fee just to watch their subs bleed only to eventually go into a F2P model in the future like so many others have been then let them. Or slowly burn and die if they can't swallow their pride and evolve. Because that's what is going to happen if they have a sub model. All of the hype in the world is a 50/50 gamble at best. Because it's a pain to just get people to be interested enough to try FFXIV: ARR after the absolute disaster that was FFXIV, how much of a pain do you imagine to get new people playing if they have to sign their credit cards up to the deal?






Edited, Oct 14th 2012 3:17pm by BainStriker
#37 Oct 14 2012 at 1:30 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Ok... charging a monthly fee will not scare away customers. I think everyone is forgetting the fact that they are releasing a FREE TRIAL to any new people who want to try it so they can see if it is worth their money, and they are offering FREE TIME to returning players so they can see if they want to continue/resub. Why wouldn't anyone try the game? If they like it they will sub.

People are able to test the game out for a reasonable amount of time and discover for themselves if they find it fun at literally NO COST!!!!!!

FFXIV is still a very unique game in how it operates and the only other one like it is FFXI.


Edited, Oct 14th 2012 3:31pm by Banwawgwa
#38 Oct 14 2012 at 5:14 PM Rating: Good
***
2,202 posts
^^ If by unique you mean backward and totally outdated we agree.
____________________________
MUTED
#39 Oct 14 2012 at 10:15 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Umm how is it outdated? How is it backward? There is no time frame on using UI's, there is no time frame on a combat system that is iconic to the FF games... They are updating combat and UI to make it more like every other mmo, but it will still have the FF feel to it. I do not understand your comment Ostia but thanks for trying to contribute :)
#40 Oct 14 2012 at 11:21 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
818 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
Umm how is it outdated? How is it backward? There is no time frame on using UI's, there is no time frame on a combat system that is iconic to the FF games... They are updating combat and UI to make it more like every other mmo, but it will still have the FF feel to it. I do not understand your comment Ostia but thanks for trying to contribute :)



Because Banwawgwa, when people like Ostia hear the word "MMO" they can't accept the normal ebb and flow of every other game on the planet. They expect quests that start and finish by you following a green dot on your map. They expect the control scheme to be that kind where you can rotate your character in place without him moving his feet. They expect that the world will be a sandbox carbon copy of every other MMO with a different franchise skin draped over it. Basically, they expect to be able to sit down at any MMO, and be a master at it because, low and behold, it is exactly like every other one that has ever come out ever.

Sorry, not sure why people like him hear "MMO" and can't fathom an offline Final Fantasy (or mass effect, prince of persia, ocarina of time, god of war, silent hill, resident evil, alan wake, fallout 3, batman arkham city, etc) style control scheme and battle system with maybe a few quests that actually require you to figure out rather than simply following a green dot on a map.

It has to be exactly what he's used to - a WoW clone in sandbox world covered in a facade painted with the franchise of his choice, boasting a shallow story and quest system (which sums up all current MMOs - or he won't be happy. For Ostia it's not about good story, solid mechanics (where it actually seems like you're making contact with the mob during melee), or loyal players. It is about jumping into something he knows exactly how to play, spending 6 months raiding for the cool gear, saying "ha I'm better than you," and then moving on to the next cookie cutter MMO.

Does that answer your question Banwawgwa?

Edited, Oct 15th 2012 1:24am by electromagnet83
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#41 Oct 15 2012 at 8:33 PM Rating: Good
***
2,202 posts
They way you are wording it, makes it sound like FFXIV is the pinnacle in MMO development, when in all reality it is still utter garbage. Otherwise why would they be making FFXIV 2.0 ? Why is Square copying modern MMO'S ? I mean if they already had the blueprints to a masterpiece of a game... Why remake it ? Oh wait wait, the game bombed and was trashed by everybody but the most rabid FF fans ? And now they are remaking it to be up to current MMO Standards :)

MMO'S have never been hard, as far as skills required in order to be good at it, they have been time consuming, wich is a totally different beast, you act like the learning curve on this game is 10000% harder than other games, because the game is actually hard and not because the way the game was designed is totally stupid. Please do mention me what other activity besides "Spamming primals" is there to do in FFXIV currently ? Oh you mean to tell me, that the only content there is in the game, is grinding for gear, just like every other MMO out there ? But the difference being the quality and quantity of Content ? Hmmm!

Yeah FFXIV is unique and innovative... Right up there with trading wards and all Smiley: lol
____________________________
MUTED
#42 Oct 15 2012 at 11:51 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
No Ostia. FFXIV bombed because the landscapes were copy paste and empty, leve quest and leveling were empty, quests were a stumble through the dark (yeah we should figure them out... but to some degree we need to be thrown a bone lol), and overall the game was empty and worthless... That is what I saw anyway. I had no grudge against combat system or the UI. In fact they can do everything they are doing in XIV including update skill animations and keep combat and UI the same and I would still play it cuz i saw no problems in it. I don't think electromagnet was making XIV to be pinnacle of mmos... (even though 2.0 may be on track for that...) but he was saying it is ridiculous to label the gameplay of the game as outdated and backward. The FF mmos are generally harder than other mmo's out there, and XIV is unique in how the job and class system work (combining skills), in its combat system (no other mmo has combat like it... take it or leave it i suppose), and the more heavy story based quests (other than leve quests).

I think you are just summing up EVERYTHING in the game into one and since you have labeled it crap you are labeling everything about it crap. But that is not the case and you need to look at elements separately. Everyone has their preferences so maybe you do not like how FFXIV plays... so be it, but you cannot deny it is quite a step from something like WoW, and please, no need for comments like "yeah, a step in the wrong direction" or anything uselessly attacking XIV further.
#43 Oct 16 2012 at 4:10 AM Rating: Good
***
2,202 posts
Please please stop with this "The FF MMO'S are harder than most other MMO'S" There has only been ONE FF MMO! Not 3 or 5, Only ONE, and it was not harder than EQ or EQ2, or Wow for that fact, time consuming does not equate Difficulty. Now as far as the UI, it was horrible, you might not have a problem with going thru 50 menus to do a simple action, but most people did, or did the game not lost 90% of it's population before the free trial was over ? Also combat was basic, unless you can explain to me why have they changed it 3 times already and are gonna change it yet again...... and as far as a more story based MMO... Really ? Vanilla wow has 1000 more quest that FFXIV 1.0 <.< one quest every 10 levels is not "More quest involved" or story heavy based, since FFXIV story is really silly, is basically a recap of major elements of the main series all mashed together Smiley: lol

Yeah FFXIV is a step foward in what ? mention me one thing where other developers are like "Wow we need to copy that and implement it into our game because is just a brilliant idea" As opposed to reality where Yoshi has stated that they are going to bring stuff from other MMO'S into FFXIV.
____________________________
MUTED
#44 Oct 16 2012 at 12:16 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Like i tried saying lol... To each their own. Other people couldn't handle the UI and what not and rage quit the game. I found no problem with it. And just because their were 1000s more quests in vanilla WoW does not mean their was a tremendous story. Most of those quests were "kill 10 naga and 15 murlocks to get some exp." so no... tons of quests is not story driven. And their has not only been one FF mmo... as we can clearly see... there are TWO! And the first one is really story oriented, however with abyssea it is my understanding that most of that is skipped now :(. But in 2.0 it sounds like they will return to story quests.

Honestly... wtf is the point of this argument? everything wrong with the game will be fixed in 2.0 so idk what there is to complain about.
#45 Oct 16 2012 at 12:38 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
I have high hopes that 2.0 will succeed.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#46 Oct 16 2012 at 3:25 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Haha yeah... from just the videos I have seen of gameplay, I don't see how it can't :P. Skill animations look great, world is beautiful, housing system sounds spot on, chocobo raising/riding/fighting :P, and leveling will take longer which is a good thing, quests will be easier to navigate and are taking a more story approach, etc, etc...

It shall indeed be epic!
#47 Oct 16 2012 at 5:31 PM Rating: Good
***
2,202 posts
Banwawgwa wrote:
Like i tried saying lol... To each their own. Other people couldn't handle the UI and what not and rage quit the game. I found no problem with it. And just because their were 1000s more quests in vanilla WoW does not mean their was a tremendous story. Most of those quests were "kill 10 naga and 15 murlocks to get some exp." so no... tons of quests is not story driven. And their has not only been one FF mmo... as we can clearly see... there are TWO! And the first one is really story oriented, however with abyssea it is my understanding that most of that is skipped now :(. But in 2.0 it sounds like they will return to story quests.

Honestly... wtf is the point of this argument? everything wrong with the game will be fixed in 2.0 so idk what there is to complain about.


It is not that they could not take the UI! It is that FFXIV Ui was a step backwards, EQ UI was better..... EQ was released in the late 90's, XIV in 2010..... I do understand that you personally did had no problem with it, but it was named one of the major problems and faults with the game when it failed, as far as wow and this claim that it is not story driven, well i think it is pretty stupid to be honest, WOW has a back story even before you set a foot in azeroth(online) and as you go zone by zone you experience each zone'z own story, and they all tie up towards the end, that has been the recepie on each expansion, the only major difference is that WOW is not dominated by long useless scenes, and the majority of the lore, is given thru text, as opposed to XIV where if anything major is gonna happen, you spend 10-15 mins watching a scene play and then proceed to kill 10 marmots or coblins. Now XI had it right.
____________________________
MUTED
#48 Oct 16 2012 at 7:31 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
Ostia wrote:
Banwawgwa wrote:
Like i tried saying lol... To each their own. Other people couldn't handle the UI and what not and rage quit the game. I found no problem with it. And just because their were 1000s more quests in vanilla WoW does not mean their was a tremendous story. Most of those quests were "kill 10 naga and 15 murlocks to get some exp." so no... tons of quests is not story driven. And their has not only been one FF mmo... as we can clearly see... there are TWO! And the first one is really story oriented, however with abyssea it is my understanding that most of that is skipped now :(. But in 2.0 it sounds like they will return to story quests.

Honestly... wtf is the point of this argument? everything wrong with the game will be fixed in 2.0 so idk what there is to complain about.


It is not that they could not take the UI! It is that FFXIV Ui was a step backwards, EQ UI was better..... EQ was released in the late 90's, XIV in 2010..... I do understand that you personally did had no problem with it, but it was named one of the major problems and faults with the game when it failed, as far as wow and this claim that it is not story driven, well i think it is pretty stupid to be honest, WOW has a back story even before you set a foot in azeroth(online) and as you go zone by zone you experience each zone'z own story, and they all tie up towards the end, that has been the recepie on each expansion, the only major difference is that WOW is not dominated by long useless scenes, and the majority of the lore, is given thru text, as opposed to XIV where if anything major is gonna happen, you spend 10-15 mins watching a scene play and then proceed to kill 10 marmots or coblins. Now XI had it right.


As much as I love FF and Square, Ostia is right in that last line (only). FFXIV sucked in the end. FFXI did it right. The only thing that made FFXI suck was it's notoriously arduous party-based grind. I know the point of MMOs is to play with other people but it was such that if you didn't, you couldn't progress. And my God who can forget waiting an hour or 2 when you were ready to go to sleep, waiting for someone to come join your party in Valkurm Dunes only for the first battle to result in widespread death and everyone quitting.

Ostia, at least give FFXIV 2.0 a realm reborn a try. It needs all the support it can get!
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
#49 Oct 16 2012 at 7:52 PM Rating: Default
*
131 posts
Ok ok, WoW did have a story. BUT! It is my personal experience that no quests really developed the story... The zones and quests inside were just there to get you to level. There was some story in instance quests and what not. There IS story in WoW and through some main quests, but it can be pushed to the sidelines so easily. WoW is all about getting to endgame and getting l337 gear and doing it in as fast as possible :(. ah well... what can ya do. I like the cutscenes, it really helps get you into story. I will not read quest text lol but I will watch cutscene! That is what I liked about SWTOR. Despite its faults... the story lines for the classes were really well done and very interesting.

So I am hoping 2.0 goes to awesome story driven game play
#50 Oct 16 2012 at 9:45 PM Rating: Good
***
2,202 posts
I am giving it my support, i have an active subscription of the game, and i play once in a while, when i am bored or i wanna check updates, i am not bashing 2.0 for nobody has played it, i am simply stating that FFXIV is not an unique or innovative game, wich is a fact. That is all.

As for wow and XIV story wise, wow does has a lot of story, probably more story/lore than both XI and XIV combined, that is a fact. The difference is in the presentation, Wow does not make you watch 50 scenes in order to progress, they whoever have started to add a few scenes in major plot points to present their story in a better way, but the story was already there in the form of text, now if you do not like to read, and just press X and miss it, that is your own fault, you cannot then turn and say "Oh X game had no story line, because it dint had scenes" Look at Xenosaga for example, It was a ****** that had to live up to the expectations set by Xenogears, and the franchise failed, because of heavy scene's that at times took half hours, move 3 steps another 15 mins of scenes, where Xenogears, had what ? 3-6 scenes in the entire game, and is considered one if not the best RPG ever made.

Also i might be a bit bias towards XIV story and concept because to me, they are relying to much into the main series, unlike XI where it was a stand alone game, with it's own lore and story.
____________________________
MUTED
#51 Oct 17 2012 at 7:29 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
818 posts
Ostia wrote:
I am giving it my support, i have an active subscription of the game, and i play once in a while, when i am bored or i wanna check updates, i am not bashing 2.0 for nobody has played it, i am simply stating that FFXIV is not an unique or innovative game, wich is a fact. That is all.

As for wow and XIV story wise, wow does has a lot of story, probably more story/lore than both XI and XIV combined, that is a fact. The difference is in the presentation, Wow does not make you watch 50 scenes in order to progress, they whoever have started to add a few scenes in major plot points to present their story in a better way, but the story was already there in the form of text, now if you do not like to read, and just press X and miss it, that is your own fault, you cannot then turn and say "Oh X game had no story line, because it dint had scenes" Look at Xenosaga for example, It was a ****** that had to live up to the expectations set by Xenogears, and the franchise failed, because of heavy scene's that at times took half hours, move 3 steps another 15 mins of scenes, where Xenogears, had what ? 3-6 scenes in the entire game, and is considered one if not the best RPG ever made.

Also i might be a bit bias towards XIV story and concept because to me, they are relying to much into the main series, unlike XI where it was a stand alone game, with it's own lore and story.


OMG xenosaga. I tried to love that game but the scenes were sooooo long. I think the only game that had longer scenes was metal gear solid: sons of liberty. I would cook dinner while watching one of the multitude of movies that the game had. By the end I was like "okay , I get it, enough already."

I don't think movie scenes are a bad thing though. And FFXI / XIV certainly does not have enough of them to warrant a comment like "make you watch 50 scenes in order to progress." I mean, dude, it's 2012. Are we really still reading everything on screen? Even though I don't play SWTOR I greatly appreciate the character dialogue even though most people will probably skip through it. It is still nice to have.
____________________________
The entire Universe to the furthest Galaxy, we are told, is no more than a closed electron existing as part of a much bigger Universe we can never see. And that Universe is only an elementary particle in a still grander Universe. An infinite regression, up and down. - Carl Sagan

Check out my Gamer Blog at http://www.baffledgamer.com/
« Previous 1 2
This forum is read only
This Forum is Read Only!
Recent Visitors: 19 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (19)