Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

I think ARR will succeed.Follow

#302 Mar 15 2013 at 11:08 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
3,599 posts
Regardless of all this f2p nonsense talk, it would and could never work without a complete and total overhaul of the game.

I doubt they would ever dare to do that a third time.

Their most profitable game is FFXI, by far. If anyone knows how to play the long-game, it's SE. They don't have to rush to pay back dev costs, so they know that, eventually, the game will generate profit.

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 1:09pm by Louiscool
____________________________


#303 Mar 15 2013 at 11:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Yep. It's just a matter of finding that sweet-spot that keeps Final Fantasy fans happy while keeping the player base large enough to generate a decent profit sooner rather than far later.

Again. I'm not concerned about the future of this game in terms of longevity.
#304 Mar 15 2013 at 11:28 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
837 posts
Wint wrote:
sandpark wrote:
Wint wrote:
Yoshi has been very clear that the game will be a subscription based model, and that's it.

Look I am not soothsaying that the game is going to fail like some players. I actually hope it does well regardless of the payment option. Yoshi can say whatever he pleases and that confidence is admirable. However the playerbase dictates what payment model remains viable and not him. The numbers will show what unfolds.


Like Hyrist said, this isn't just Yoshi, this is Square Enix saying this.


While i agree and to be honest i don't see ARR going F2P i must also say that many PTP games that came out had to turn to F2P or else they would have to shut down. What i mean with this is even though SE says its gonna be P2P, at some point, maybe a year from when its released or 2 or at any rate when and IF (there is a big if here) the game doesn't deliver SE may change to F2P in order to cover their expenses and make some profit. Examples of these are SWTOR, Star trek online and many more.

That will boost the traffic and may boost their profits as well. I do not know the numbers but i do see the same F2P games for more than 6 years and they are still going.

If you ask me though i do not want to see an F2P model for ARR.
____________________________
YaY signature!! (i was never good with signatures >_<)

Grim Reaperz (Ultros server)
#305 Mar 15 2013 at 11:50 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
As Hyrist said, the F2P model from "failed" games is usually at the demands of the investors and the shareholders. SE doesn't have to worry about either of them. They can play a long game here.

I wonder if it's also cultural. How popular are F2P games in Japan in general?
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#306 Mar 15 2013 at 12:17 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
I pulled my numbers out of thin air. I would guess they're shooting for 4-5k per server, 5k being the absolute max, so I think you can make a safe bet on the number of subs with the number of servers they launch. I was just demonstrating a point that with even 100k you still are making pretty good money each month.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#308 Mar 15 2013 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Wint wrote:
sandpark wrote:
Wint wrote:
Yoshi has been very clear that the game will be a subscription based model, and that's it.

Look I am not soothsaying that the game is going to fail like some players. I actually hope it does well regardless of the payment option. Yoshi can say whatever he pleases and that confidence is admirable. However the playerbase dictates what payment model remains viable and not him. The numbers will show what unfolds.


Like Hyrist said, this isn't just Yoshi, this is Square Enix saying this.


If it's "SE" saying it, you can rest assured that it's Wada saying it, and you can rest assured that Wada will do whatever it takes to generate a profit. Consumer PR 101: better to promise now and to apologize later.

I'm just saying, it wouldn't be the first time.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#309 Mar 15 2013 at 1:33 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Quote:
Fantasy Earth Zero (Japanese: ファンタジーアースゼロ), formerly known as Fantasy Earth: The Ring of Dominion, is a massive multiplayer online game (MMO) developed by Fenix Soft(Square Enix) (the original developers, Multiterm, were absorbed into NHN Japan on September 1, 2007,[1] however development rights transferred to Fenix Soft on June 2008[2]).

Several months after the release of The Ring of Dominion, Square Enix cancelled the game because of a severe lack of demand. The publishing rights were later bought by Gamepot, who renamed it to Fantasy Earth Zero and had greater success with it when they dropped the subscription-based element present under Square Enix's PlayOnline service and it became a "free to play" game. The game recently claimed over 1,200,000 users.[3][4] Revenue is generated using an in-game currency known as "arbs", which are bought for real money and can purchase items obtainable in no other way.


So pretty much Square Enix was the guys pulling the strings on developers that had already flopped in the development of the game. Then sold it off when the assets proved unprofitable. It was never an in-house project from start to finish.

So no, it didn't happen before. Not even close, really, seeming SE closed the game down and sold off the distribution rights.
#310 Mar 15 2013 at 1:50 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
It's cute that you think there's such a big difference. The only difference that matters in the least is that this game is titled Final Fantasy XIV instead of Fantasy Earth Zero.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#311 Mar 15 2013 at 2:08 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
The only difference that matters in the least is that this game is titled Final Fantasy XIV instead of Fantasy Earth Zero.


I agree with Hyrist that these situations aren't the same, but I also believe the Final Fantasy name is our virtual guarantee that FFXIV won't be allowed to easily drift into F2P mode.

Square Enix can certainly afford to wait as long as it takes for this game to become profitable through monthly subscriptions. If SE's main concern with FFXIV was to make a profit, then honestly, they probably would have shut it down long ago, or at least carried on with Version 1.x without spending all the money on ARR.

Of course, nothing in this business world is ever a 100-percent guarantee... but I simply don't see FFXIV going F2P, even if it doesn't get as many players as SE hopes.

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 1:09pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#312 Mar 15 2013 at 2:18 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Kachi wrote:
It's cute that you think there's such a big difference. The only difference that matters in the least is that this game is titled Final Fantasy XIV instead of Fantasy Earth Zero.


You've never taken any business classes, I see. There are gigantic differences in legal and financial liability as well as investments.

But at least you're right about the name. The impact of a Final Fantasy on Square Enix as a brand is not to be underestimated. That alone causes major differences, which would encourage SE not to let a flagship title go free to play.
#313 Mar 15 2013 at 2:53 PM Rating: Default
***
2,202 posts
Hyrist wrote:
Quote:
Fantasy Earth Zero (Japanese: ファンタジーアースゼロ), formerly known as Fantasy Earth: The Ring of Dominion, is a massive multiplayer online game (MMO) developed by Fenix Soft(Square Enix) (the original developers, Multiterm, were absorbed into NHN Japan on September 1, 2007,[1] however development rights transferred to Fenix Soft on June 2008[2]).

Several months after the release of The Ring of Dominion, Square Enix cancelled the game because of a severe lack of demand. The publishing rights were later bought by Gamepot, who renamed it to Fantasy Earth Zero and had greater success with it when they dropped the subscription-based element present under Square Enix's PlayOnline service and it became a "free to play" game. The game recently claimed over 1,200,000 users.[3][4] Revenue is generated using an in-game currency known as "arbs", which are bought for real money and can purchase items obtainable in no other way.


So pretty much Square Enix was the guys pulling the strings on developers that had already flopped in the development of the game. Then sold it off when the assets proved unprofitable. It was never an in-house project from start to finish.

So no, it didn't happen before. Not even close, really, seeming SE closed the game down and sold off the distribution rights.


Why did you glossed over the lack of insight in SE part ? The game after being sold, had great sucess..... That is one asset SE had but since they live in the stone age where unable to capitalize.

Really this blind fate on SE is kinda silly at times.
____________________________
MUTED
#314 Mar 15 2013 at 3:00 PM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Ostia wrote:
Really this blind fate on SE is kinda silly at times.


So is the rampant hatred and bashing.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#315 Mar 15 2013 at 3:12 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,202 posts
Hey there is far more evidence in my favor that they are an incopetent company at best now days, than that againts all odds they will succed because "Yoshi".
____________________________
MUTED
#316 Mar 15 2013 at 3:17 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Thayos wrote:

Square Enix can certainly afford to wait as long as it takes for this game to become profitable through monthly subscriptions. If SE's main concern with FFXIV was to make a profit, then honestly, they probably would have shut it down long ago, or at least carried on with Version 1.x without spending all the money on ARR.



Unfortunately it's not just a waiting game. Running an MMO has a certain expense threshold that requires a minimum number of subscribers to be profitable. One of the main reasons F2P games manage to be profitable is by significantly reducing those expenses, lowering the expense threshold considerably. They gain more players and generally need a smaller, less qualified staff.

Hyrist wrote:
Kachi wrote:
It's cute that you think there's such a big difference. The only difference that matters in the least is that this game is titled Final Fantasy XIV instead of Fantasy Earth Zero.


You've never taken any business classes, I see. There are gigantic differences in legal and financial liability as well as investments.

But at least you're right about the name. The impact of a Final Fantasy on Square Enix as a brand is not to be underestimated. That alone causes major differences, which would encourage SE not to let a flagship title go free to play.


There are differences, but they aren't pertinent to my point.

The point of bringing up Fantasy Earth Zero is that SE has shown that they have a first-hand understanding of how abandoning an MMO can be more profitable than sticking it out. And it worked. The game was much more successful as a result of abandoning the subscription model. If you don't think Wada's gears are turning with consideration for that, you're the one who doesn't understand how business works. At a certain point, Wada isn't going to care about the brand name. He's going to spin it into an explanation for why F2P is the best thing for the fans, it's not a failure but a "modern" business model that they should have considered earlier, it doesn't reflect poorly of the game, etc.

If the game doesn't succeed this time, they'd be insane to let them keep sinking money into it.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#317 Mar 15 2013 at 3:17 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
636 posts
Wint wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Really this blind fate on SE is kinda silly at times.


So is the rampant hatred and bashing.


Wint wrote:
Ostia wrote:
Really this blind fate on SE is kinda silly at times.


So is the rampant hatred and bashing.


This.

Anyways, we'll most likely never see this go F2P, if 11 hasn't, I doubt that 14 will. As for my faith in this game, I do sometimes doubt that it will change, but from everything I see, my interest is piqued, so I'll be buying it day 1, and will at least stay for my free month, if I'm not impressed with it, I'll give it a few months and try again. I'm mainly interested in it as a console MMORPG, since there really isn't one this gen, but the game now looks polished, and it seems like they fixed a bit of what made 1.0 bad
#318 Mar 15 2013 at 3:48 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
If the game doesn't succeed this time, they'd be insane to let them keep sinking money into it.


Actually, it's not uncommon at all for companies to take a loss on their flagship service, as long as the company on the whole remains profitable. Sometimes, the brand is more important than the profit from that brand. The brand helps to sell the other products, resulting in profit.

Hence why FFXIV will likely never go F2P.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#319 Mar 15 2013 at 3:57 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
If the game doesn't succeed this time, they'd be insane to let them keep sinking money into it.


Actually, it's not uncommon at all for companies to take a loss on their flagship service, as long as the company on the whole remains profitable. Sometimes, the brand is more important than the profit from that brand. The brand helps to sell the other products, resulting in profit.


See, for example, Google's search engine.
#320 Mar 15 2013 at 4:06 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I suppose you could be right about that. Not that it will make the game a success by any measure, but it is a potential path to maintaining the game on a subscription model. Still, it requires only a certain amount of calculated loss. They'll probably still need 100k subs at minimum, which should be doable.

And even then, it would be a surprise to all of ten people if they went back on their word and switched to a more profitable F2P model.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#321 Mar 15 2013 at 4:46 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
If the game doesn't succeed this time, they'd be insane to let them keep sinking money into it.


Actually, it's not uncommon at all for companies to take a loss on their flagship service, as long as the company on the whole remains profitable. Sometimes, the brand is more important than the profit from that brand. The brand helps to sell the other products, resulting in profit.

Hence why FFXIV will likely never go F2P.


Why are you arguing so strongly against something that Yoshi himself has said he has no problems with. He stated the game will launch as pay to play to live upto that promise, he also said they could very well change the payment system later on.

When a company says this it means they plan to do it, because they will deny it to **** and back if they have yet to make up their mind. The fact Yoshi straight up said it's a distinct possibility shows it's gonna happen. If you deny it...well it's just white knight blindness.
____________________________
BANNED
#322 Mar 15 2013 at 5:04 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,438 posts
You also see a lot of modern MMOs going from sub to f2p because they overreached (hi, SWTOR). Many of them really did think they were going to be the next WoW and have millions of subscribers, in which case the subscription model makes perfect sense. Then reality happened and they "bottomed out" around 700k to 1m people and couldn't sustain their game at that level.

Not because that level is unsustainable, but because they overreached to begin with.

I don't see FFXIV having that problem for a couple of reasons:
1: FFXI topped out at about 500k people and SE was perfectly happy with that. Getting to that level again shouldn't be terribly difficult. It's an entirely realistic number.
2: FFXIV 1.0 bombed so colossally that the current plan cannot possibly include numbers above 500k. In fact I'd think they'd be able to run the game at 250-300k and be perfectly fine. Maybe even lower than that.

The trend of new MMOs reaching for WoW's impossible subscriber base is fading away now. New MMOs are coming out to support a niche in the audience. Which is exactly the right thing to do here.

Free-to-play also doesn't have to be abusive. GW2 does this pretty well actually. All the paid items are available in-game (albeit rare), and none of them contribute in any significant way to player power.

SWTOR is a good example of a game that did f2p badly. Hilariously badly.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#323 Mar 15 2013 at 5:26 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,102 posts
I feel like people took my post about F2P far too seriously. I said they COULD, and that was a giant IF the game failed. I like subscription based MMO's better, because you can see the difference in the content, the updates and quality of the game. (Most of the time.) I have no issue paying SE for my subscription. I was simply continuing the conversation in a theoretical sense about FFXIV breaking even on the money they have spent on making, breaking, and revamping the game. All I was saying is, it wont be an issue no matter what happens, because they will have options.

Also, Yoshida never said never. (Oh God that phrase is ruined forever. Thank you Justin Bieber, you little tool.) He just said they weren't going F2P for ARR. He has a lot of wiggle room to do what he see's fit, and he has made it clear that each type of system has its own pro's and con's.

Edited, Mar 15th 2013 6:30pm by Ryklin
____________________________
------------------
#324 Mar 15 2013 at 8:46 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
If you deny it...well it's just white knight blindness.


I am not denying anything. I'm saying it's not likely to go F2P. There's a big difference between "never" and "not likely."

If you honestly think it's likely to go F2P, then I don't think you understand exactly how much the Final Fantasy brand means to Square Enix. Yoshi-P hasn't ruled out F2P (no good businessman ever rules anything out), but he's also made it perfectly clear that this game is not at all designed for a F2P model.

But I guess if being realistic is white knighting in this day in age, then you can call me Sir Lancelot.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#325 Mar 16 2013 at 3:55 AM Rating: Default
***
2,202 posts
Archmage Callinon wrote:
You also see a lot of modern MMOs going from sub to f2p because they overreached (hi, SWTOR). Many of them really did think they were going to be the next WoW and have millions of subscribers, in which case the subscription model makes perfect sense. Then reality happened and they "bottomed out" around 700k to 1m people and couldn't sustain their game at that level.

Not because that level is unsustainable, but because they overreached to begin with.

I don't see FFXIV having that problem for a couple of reasons:
1: FFXI topped out at about 500k people and SE was perfectly happy with that. Getting to that level again shouldn't be terribly difficult. It's an entirely realistic number.
2: FFXIV 1.0 bombed so colossally that the current plan cannot possibly include numbers above 500k. In fact I'd think they'd be able to run the game at 250-300k and be perfectly fine. Maybe even lower than that.

The trend of new MMOs reaching for WoW's impossible subscriber base is fading away now. New MMOs are coming out to support a niche in the audience. Which is exactly the right thing to do here.

Free-to-play also doesn't have to be abusive. GW2 does this pretty well actually. All the paid items are available in-game (albeit rare), and none of them contribute in any significant way to player power.

SWTOR is a good example of a game that did f2p badly. Hilariously badly.



Swotor can sustain itself with 500K Subs, 700-1mil is profits all the way to the bank.

Also everything else you said is correct.
____________________________
MUTED
#326 Mar 16 2013 at 4:18 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Square has spent a vast amount of money on this game, the only honest way they can recoupe that money is with free to play. Games make a ton more money as free to play than they do as pay to play, this is well proven fact. The only reason they launch as pay to play is to make the surge of money at the start from box sales. The more money a game spends on development the less chance they will make it back under pay to play in a saturated market, this game will simply not be able to keep FFXI type player numbers past the first month. Given that they need free to play not only to make more money but also to stop the game becoming unplayable due to low numbers.

Even Japan is releasing games like phantasy star online 2 under free to play so this isn't something they are against.

Also I've played a lot of MMOs and when you see something like this:

Quote:
RPG Site: The MMO world was hit with the news that Star Wars: The Old Republic going partially free-to-play - given this news, how do you feel about other models than subscription?

Yoshdia: We're not in the position to say that a free to play model is better or a subscription model is better - really, it kind of depends. It depends on the type of game. Each model has its benefits - each model has its good points and its bad points.

What we want to do is that - we originally promised fans that we were going to release this type of game - it was going to be a subscription model. You'd pay a certain amount of money and you'd get a certain amount of time to be on the servers for 24 hours. This is what we promised. The first and foremost thing is to follow up on this promise and release it.

That doesn't mean to say we're not watching and considering other types of business models - like a hybrid model or free to play models - for the future, but that's something we'll think of after we've fulfilled that first promise.


Translation: free to play after 6-12 months.

It's not if, it's when. Even if you totally dismiss that they can't make money from pay to play long term the player loss after the first month will be embarassing and make the game almost unplayable. The only way you can explain a company spending this amount of money on a rebuild is by going free to play. Heck it doens't even have what SWTOR has in that it's the only SW based MMO out there, this game also has to compete for FF fans with FFXI, a game that honestly has shoes too big for this game to ever fill.

Bumping this topic in 6 months after release just to show how dumb some people are being.



Edited, Mar 16th 2013 6:20am by preludes

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 6:21am by preludes
____________________________
BANNED
#327 Mar 16 2013 at 4:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
837 posts
To be honest it is really too early to talk about this kind of things. The fact remains that the game will launch as a P2P. We have a long way until we see if the game is gonna go F2P.

With that been said, if the game in fact go with a F2P model what remains is what kind of F2P will it be.

Even if it goes F2P i want it to have a subscription fee that has everything without me having to pay for this and that. Something like Age of Conan did if i am not mistaken?

In general though, if the game is good well balanced and people like it, P2P is more than enough to give good profit to SE.

And lets not forget that if SE cares for the game and the FF games at general they should try to keep it at its best shape and not go for the easy way out with a F2P model. I understand that profit is what matters but that is also how you lose fans.

Thats my 2 cents in the matter.
____________________________
YaY signature!! (i was never good with signatures >_<)

Grim Reaperz (Ultros server)
#328 Mar 16 2013 at 5:17 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
931 posts
catwho wrote:
As Hyrist said, the F2P model from "failed" games is usually at the demands of the investors and the shareholders. SE doesn't have to worry about either of them. They can play a long game here.

I wonder if it's also cultural. How popular are F2P games in Japan in general?


very. you might be familiar with the phantasy star online series, SEGA is making more money than they ever have on it with PSO2 using a free to play/premium/cash shop model in japan.

I would say in japan the f2p/p2p situation for MMOs is about the same as anywhere else.

f2p dominates the mmorpg market and it's easy to understand why. you can keep playing/progressing on your character without spending any money, and if you want to (and many do) you spend a ton. in the end this causes more profits overall which is why so many companies are doing it.

in japan, barely any p2p games come out anymore, the only recent one I can think of is dragon quest X, which they can only get away with because its dragon quest... and who knows how long that will last.

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 7:32am by Poubelle
____________________________
MUTED
#329 Mar 16 2013 at 6:02 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
Games make a ton more money as free to play than they do as pay to play, this is well proven fact.

And I say this is well-proven bullsh*t. It completely depends on the longevity of your game. Even a quick surge of
return after switching to a FtP/cash shop/BtP model will never compensate for the profit you lose by skipping
subscription fees altogether and alienating players that are disgusted by the prospect of microtransactioning
their way to a quick victory (or see others do it); if your game had been able to retain sufficient player numbers
with a PtP model in the first place.

FtP (or rather: play for free as a second class citizen, and pay whenever you want a service a PtP game would
provide for free) is just the ultima ratio when your game is not good enough to warrant a subscription. Sometimes
this turns a dying game into a profit; and just as often, it does not. Your assertion that it is always "the" best strategy
for a company is a completely unjustified generalization. If you were correct, money-hungry Blizzard would have
changed WoW long ago.

Btw, pro-info: Player numbers in a FtP game are a completely meaningless statistic, because those who join a game
for a free ride right because they are tight on money are quite unlikely to spend a fortune in the cash shop. Try
to wrap your head around PR talk.

Edited, Mar 16th 2013 8:12am by Rinsui
#330 Mar 16 2013 at 8:22 AM Rating: Excellent


Not to mention that most FFXIV gamers probably came from FFXi, a steadfast P2P game, even now that server populations are low. SE doesn't seem eager to turn that game into a cash grab, either.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#331 Mar 16 2013 at 8:41 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
4,773 posts
Thayos wrote:
Quote:
If you deny it...well it's just white knight blindness.


I am not denying anything. I'm saying it's not likely to go F2P. There's a big difference between "never" and "not likely."

If you honestly think it's likely to go F2P, then I don't think you understand exactly how much the Final Fantasy brand means to Square Enix. Yoshi-P hasn't ruled out F2P (no good businessman ever rules anything out), but he's also made it perfectly clear that this game is not at all designed for a F2P model.

But I guess if being realistic is white knighting in this day in age, then you can call me Sir Lancelot.


Sir Lancelot boinked the King's Wife.

Call me Sir Galahad or Sir William Wallace.
#332 Mar 16 2013 at 9:30 AM Rating: Excellent


Boink Boink!
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#333 Mar 16 2013 at 1:09 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
If they were being bloody brilliant, they would have rebuilt FFXI on the FFXIV engine, migrated the playerbase to the new game entirely, and launched the FFXIV changes as a massive expansion to FFXI. New content is overrated in MMOs these days. What players really want is establishment. It's a key part of the social experience in MMOs. They want to believe that the character they're working on won't just be a forgotten waste of time, but that they will actually be recognized by other players. Even if they prefer to play solo, the recognition of their character as an extension of themselves is a major motivation for most players. If a game even looks like it might fail, that's a huge blow to player motivation.

To have a game that already enjoys establishment is an invaluable resource. If SE hadn't neglected it so much, and had tried to keep the game up to date (including a certain level of overhaul), they could have recaptured a great deal of the XI playerbase and launched it almost as a brand new game to the market. At this point, a redesign of an established game would be much more appealing to nearly everyone than a relaunch of a new game that already failed.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#334 Mar 16 2013 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Kachi wrote:
If they were being bloody brilliant, they would have rebuilt FFXI on the FFXIV engine, migrated the playerbase to the new game entirely, and launched the FFXIV changes as a massive expansion to FFXI. New content is overrated in MMOs these days. What players really want is establishment. It's a key part of the social experience in MMOs. They want to believe that the character they're working on won't just be a forgotten waste of time, but that they will actually be recognized by other players. Even if they prefer to play solo, the recognition of their character as an extension of themselves is a major motivation for most players. If a game even looks like it might fail, that's a huge blow to player motivation.

To have a game that already enjoys establishment is an invaluable resource. If SE hadn't neglected it so much, and had tried to keep the game up to date (including a certain level of overhaul), they could have recaptured a great deal of the XI playerbase and launched it almost as a brand new game to the market. At this point, a redesign of an established game would be much more appealing to nearly everyone than a relaunch of a new game that already failed.


It's a good thing they didn't do that!

Because if they had done that on FFXIV's engine as you said, they would have destroyed FFXI by dropping everyone who didn't have a powerful enough PC (including PS2 and 360 players), and then adding further insult to injury, they would have ruined their reputation among the remaining PC players with the horrible engine they chose to run the game on.

There would have been almost no new players to the game both because no one is interested in jumping into a EQ-style MMO these days, no matter how modernized (as UO's Richard Garriott and EQ's Brad McQuaid found out in 2007 with Tabula Rasa and Vanguard). It wouldn't bring in the substantial number of FF players who don't have time for a hardcore MMO. Not that it would matter because the scathing reviews FFXIV got would have actually been the final nails in FFXI's coffin. Not even Yoshida could have reversed that catastrophe, in my opinion.

And worst of all, FFXI currently is still making money for SE while FFXIV is being reborn from the ashes. If FFXI was the one that was turned into FFXIV, all of that revenue would be lost while it sat broken for years.

Sure FFXI can be modernized, but only in small bits here and there. A whole new engine and the assets to go with it is tremendously expensive and prone to bugs and failures; it's not a cheap and easy thing to do. Asking people to upgrade their hardware to keep playing the new version of FFXI will invariably drop people for good, and it won't really bring in enough new people to replace them. The problem with FFXI isn't really that it doesn't look good enough, it's that its play-style is fundamentally old school from a different era in MMOs that the next generation isn't interested in, and if you're going to change that, you may as well start all over.
#335 Mar 16 2013 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Of course they could keep servers open for those players; that's no question. Also, FFXI isn't as hardcore as it once was, and new content certainly would not be. The problems you're describing have simple solutions.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#336 Mar 16 2013 at 2:17 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
636 posts
We'll see how it does, who knows, maybe SE won't be content with 500k-ish people world wide this time, we honestly don't know.

To me, it will be a success if it can hold me for more than 3 months...and if they continue to put these references and cameos in.
#337 Mar 16 2013 at 2:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
Kachi wrote:
The problems you're describing have simple solutions.


That's precisely my point.
#338 Mar 16 2013 at 7:27 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,202 posts
Xoie wrote:
Kachi wrote:
The problems you're describing have simple solutions.


That's precisely my point.


Finally an agreement!! REJOYCE!! PEOPLE FROM ZAM!!!
____________________________
MUTED
#339 Mar 16 2013 at 10:03 PM Rating: Good
***
2,232 posts
Xoie wrote:
Kachi wrote:
The problems you're describing have simple solutions.


That's precisely my point.


Well, then you should email Yoshi-P and Wada straight away. I'm sure once they hear what you have to say they'll be all over it! Smiley: oyvey

I find it hard to believe that SE hasn't literally put every idea on the board already. If they're going in this direction it's because they feel it's the best solution for them to fix their monumental mistake. All I'm saying is there's a reason they're doing things the way they are. Whether you feel those ideas are the best or not will I suppose determine your individual satisfaction. But to keep coming back to this whole "They're doing it all wrong" argument is inane.



Edited, Mar 16th 2013 9:07pm by LebargeX
____________________________
Character: Urzol Thrush
Server: Ultros
FC: The Kraken Club

Outshined

Teneleven wrote:
We secretly replaced your tank wemelchor with Foldgers Crystal's. Let's see what happens.

#340 Mar 17 2013 at 1:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
837 posts
Xoie wrote:
Kachi wrote:
If they were being bloody brilliant, they would have rebuilt FFXI on the FFXIV engine, migrated the playerbase to the new game entirely, and launched the FFXIV changes as a massive expansion to FFXI. New content is overrated in MMOs these days. What players really want is establishment. It's a key part of the social experience in MMOs. They want to believe that the character they're working on won't just be a forgotten waste of time, but that they will actually be recognized by other players. Even if they prefer to play solo, the recognition of their character as an extension of themselves is a major motivation for most players. If a game even looks like it might fail, that's a huge blow to player motivation.

To have a game that already enjoys establishment is an invaluable resource. If SE hadn't neglected it so much, and had tried to keep the game up to date (including a certain level of overhaul), they could have recaptured a great deal of the XI playerbase and launched it almost as a brand new game to the market. At this point, a redesign of an established game would be much more appealing to nearly everyone than a relaunch of a new game that already failed.


It's a good thing they didn't do that!

Because if they had done that on FFXIV's engine as you said, they would have destroyed FFXI by dropping everyone who didn't have a powerful enough PC (including PS2 and 360 players), and then adding further insult to injury, they would have ruined their reputation among the remaining PC players with the horrible engine they chose to run the game on.

There would have been almost no new players to the game both because no one is interested in jumping into a EQ-style MMO these days, no matter how modernized (as UO's Richard Garriott and EQ's Brad McQuaid found out in 2007 with Tabula Rasa and Vanguard). It wouldn't bring in the substantial number of FF players who don't have time for a hardcore MMO. Not that it would matter because the scathing reviews FFXIV got would have actually been the final nails in FFXI's coffin. Not even Yoshida could have reversed that catastrophe, in my opinion.

And worst of all, FFXI currently is still making money for SE while FFXIV is being reborn from the ashes. If FFXI was the one that was turned into FFXIV, all of that revenue would be lost while it sat broken for years.

Sure FFXI can be modernized, but only in small bits here and there. A whole new engine and the assets to go with it is tremendously expensive and prone to bugs and failures; it's not a cheap and easy thing to do. Asking people to upgrade their hardware to keep playing the new version of FFXI will invariably drop people for good, and it won't really bring in enough new people to replace them. The problem with FFXI isn't really that it doesn't look good enough, it's that its play-style is fundamentally old school from a different era in MMOs that the next generation isn't interested in, and if you're going to change that, you may as well start all over.


I agree 100% with you. FFXI had its course in the game industry and still goes. You can't just take it down and rebuild something anew from it. You don't know if the players want that. And if they did you would still need to re make the game engine. Overall i believe if they wanted to revive the FF XI they would have to remake the whole game all over again. Something they did with making a new game already. But again i don't know how the players would react in a complete overhaul of their loved game.

In my books its more profitable to have 2 games with lets say 100k subscribers than have 1. Because if they did remake XI and they had failed with it then SE would have been left with nothing in its hands. So you could say that XI is the safety pillow for SE.
____________________________
YaY signature!! (i was never good with signatures >_<)

Grim Reaperz (Ultros server)
#341 Mar 17 2013 at 9:45 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
If they were being bloody brilliant, they would have rebuilt FFXI on the FFXIV engine, migrated the playerbase to the new game entirely, and launched the FFXIV changes as a massive expansion to FFXI. New content is overrated in MMOs these days. What players really want is establishment. It's a key part of the social experience in MMOs. They want to believe that the character they're working on won't just be a forgotten waste of time, but that they will actually be recognized by other players. Even if they prefer to play solo, the recognition of their character as an extension of themselves is a major motivation for most players. If a game even looks like it might fail, that's a huge blow to player motivation.

To have a game that already enjoys establishment is an invaluable resource. If SE hadn't neglected it so much, and had tried to keep the game up to date (including a certain level of overhaul), they could have recaptured a great deal of the XI playerbase and launched it almost as a brand new game to the market. At this point, a redesign of an established game would be much more appealing to nearly everyone than a relaunch of a new game that already failed.

In my opinion, that's yet another baseless overgeneralization. While I enjoy some continuity (that's why I log in less now than three weeks ago), there's a limit to it. FFXI, I've been there, I've done that. And my old character well deserved to die in time to be fondly remembered.

There's a beauty to starting "fresh" that I find hard to be copied by even the greatest overhaul; which, btw, might be one of the main liabilities of ARR. But hey. Yoshi pretty much shattered the world, changed every class, introduced new ones and even added new races. There's little more you can ask for.

In that regard, I am very happy I made the choice not to play the game till the bitter end; because by now,"going back" feels at least a little like starting fresh.
#342 Mar 17 2013 at 1:14 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
I think most would feel content with starting fresh on a new player server, personally. It's true they'd have to rebuild FFXI from scratch, but they'd know what they were building, which is nothing to underestimate. Again, you leave the old servers up for people who want to play on lower end hardware or don't want a new gameplay experience. Nobody loses out.

Of course that's not going to happen, and I doubt it was seriously considered in the discussion of ARR. But my point is that if they put in the resources to turn FFXI into a modern game while creating "fresh start" servers and gameplay, then porting over character data for those who wanted to, it would likely do well.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#343 Mar 17 2013 at 2:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Honestly, all the XI folks really want is an updated graphics engine. We were promised a new UI on PC, modernized with movable layouts and stuff, but that hasn't happened yet. I'd like higher quality models and stuff.

But if someone said XI as you know it is shutting off, here's a HQ game with all the same plots and all the same stuff and OH YEAH you're now level 1 again, I wouldn't touch it with a fifty foot pole.

XI has meaning to me because of all the sh*t I went through with my friends, but also because of everything I've accomplished in it with those friends. I'm a relic bard with all twenty jobs leveled up and all expansions and major content completed. Telling me I have to start over as a level one would be taking all that away from me. Such a thing might get the people who get before Abyssea came out, but it would be giving a giant @#%^ YOU to all the players who kept on playing after the level cap went up to 75.

No, they made the right decision by making Eorzea a distinct world from Vana'diel, and they also made the right decision to let folks keep their existing characters from 1.0 with all their gear and titles intact, should they so desire.

Edited, Mar 17th 2013 4:57pm by catwho
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#344 Mar 17 2013 at 3:19 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Huh? That's not what I was saying at all. I was saying you would keep your character data entirely. Basically, rather than FFXIV, it would be FFXI with a massive expansion on a new engine with updated gameplay. All optional--anyone who wants to stay on old servers is welcome to.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#345 Mar 17 2013 at 3:44 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
Huh? That's not what I was saying at all. I was saying you would keep your character data entirely. Basically, rather than FFXIV, it would be FFXI with a massive expansion on a new engine with updated gameplay. All optional--anyone who wants to stay on old servers is welcome to.

Who would join a game that was considered so-so for ten years?
The rabid fans? Gosh, even the transition to ARR is met with a
very stiff breeze of resistance by those in the beta I heard.
Just imagine someone went and tempered with the last
refuge of "oldschool leets"? The horror... THE HORROR!
#346 Mar 17 2013 at 3:55 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
My guess would be about 90% of the existing FFXI playerbase and enough new players and previously departed players to make the game a success. Again, relying on a new gameplay experience. Though to be honest, I don't have my thumb on the pulse of the current player population in FFXI. I think what kept most players going in FFXI was the sense of meaningful progression and the community-based play. Provided that transferred to the "FFXI 2.0" I don't think you lose those players, and you've got sufficient content to keep new players, even once-removed players, happy for years.

I understand how it doesn't sound appealing at first, and I understand the challenges that would go with it. I also think there's a payoff to it that's being underestimated. Which is all totally, pointlessly speculative, but even if I'm completely wrong, it's more interesting to discuss it than nothing.
____________________________
Hyrist wrote:
Ok, now we're going to get slash fiction of Wint x Kachi somehere... rule 34 and all...

Never confuse your inference as the listener for an implication of the speaker.

Good games are subjective like good food is subjective. You're not going to seriously tell me that there's not a psychological basis for why pizza is great and lutefisk is revolting. The thing about subjectivity is that, as subjects go, humans actually have a great deal in common.
#347 Mar 17 2013 at 5:52 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Kachi wrote:
My guess would be about 90% of the existing FFXI playerbase and enough new players and previously departed players to make the game a success. Again, relying on a new gameplay experience. Though to be honest, I don't have my thumb on the pulse of the current player population in FFXI. I think what kept most players going in FFXI was the sense of meaningful progression and the community-based play. Provided that transferred to the "FFXI 2.0" I don't think you lose those players, and you've got sufficient content to keep new players, even once-removed players, happy for years.

I understand how it doesn't sound appealing at first, and I understand the challenges that would go with it. I also think there's a payoff to it that's being underestimated. Which is all totally, pointlessly speculative, but even if I'm completely wrong, it's more interesting to discuss it than nothing.


I can think of one person who actually wanted this for XIV. Out of all the hundreds of people who played. He seriously thought that XIV was going to be XI with updated graphics, and SE would close all our XI accounts and force us into XIV, only for it to be a "surprise! updated FFXI!" for everyone. He was crushed when he found out that wasn't the case, but I think the rest of us were relieved.

XI is still doing quite well on its current engine. PS2 support for the US has been dropped and for Japan I think it's going to end once SE pulls the plug on PS2. The FFXI expansion due at the end of the month is going to be the last game ever released for PS2, and I expect that Sony will announce end of life support for the PS2 once the PS4 is on the shelves. At that point, SE can stop trying to deal with the nightmare of ten year old hardware and we'll only be faced with "Xbox 360" limitations XD

There have been quite a few groups who have formed on various XI servers, including mine, who have tried to recreate the "old school FFXI" feel, with a six man static party on a formal job set up. Those groups usually dissolve within a month. Sure, you get the nostalgia hit, but you also get all the things that were awful about old school FFXI parties - 4k exp/hour, death without reraise, having to quit when one person needs to leave, etc. Also, SE screwed up a lot of the old camps by dumping level 100 mobs into them for the people who didn't purchase Abyssea to have a place to exp. So even if you get a 6 man level 40 static, you sure as **** aren't going to be in the basement of Crawler's Nest any more.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#348 Mar 18 2013 at 8:32 AM Rating: Decent
catwho wrote:
[quote=Kachi]. Also, SE screwed up a lot of the old camps by dumping level 100 mobs into them for the people who didn't purchase Abyssea to have a place to exp. .


Wait. what? They really did that?
____________________________
Ffxi 2004-2009
Server: Asura
Drk 75, drg 75, drg 75

Why they need to raise level cap?;(
#349 Mar 18 2013 at 8:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
Kiipo wrote:
catwho wrote:
[quote=Kachi]. Also, SE screwed up a lot of the old camps by dumping level 100 mobs into them for the people who didn't purchase Abyssea to have a place to exp. .


Wait. what? They really did that?


I'm not sure Dangruf Wadi is a place you would go to XP...but yes they did revamp some of the low level areas with higher level mobs deeper in. For example in Dangruf Wadi, if you go to the upper level where that one spout drops you off there are now high level gobbies there instead of the lower level versions.
____________________________
"Choosy MMO's choose Wint." - Louiscool
The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to convince the world he didn't exist.
Keyser Soze - Ultros
Guide to Setting Up Mumble on a Raspberry Pi
#350 Mar 18 2013 at 9:20 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Modified zones:
- Garliage Citadel Basement - Level 100 ish bats and various other nasty things
- Ranguemont Pass: Level 90 goblins, bats, various other things
- Crawler's Nest: Basement completely redone with level 90+ funguars and flies and beetles
- Eldieme Necropolis: Basement completely redone with level 85-100 skeletons and other things
- Aforementioned Dangruf Wadi

All mobs can be sneaked or invis'd past, and while they are along the route to various quest ???s and paths to other areas, they are not directly in aggro range. Aside from Garliage and CN, none of them were really used for camps, but both of those area's usual exp camps were totally switched up. Now Garliage and CN's usable camps are preferred Grounds of Valor camps from 30-50ish. No one bothers with the level 90-100 mobs.
____________________________
FFXI: Catwho on Bismarck: Retired December 2014
Thayos wrote:
I can't understand anyone who skips the cutscenes of a Final Fantasy game. That's like going to Texas and not getting barbecue.

FFXIV: Katarh Mest and Taprara Rara on Lamia Server - Member of The Swarm
Curator of the XIV Wallpapers Tumblr and the XIV Fashion Tumblr
#351 Mar 18 2013 at 9:23 AM Rating: Good
***
3,438 posts
Quote:
Aside from Garliage and CN, none of them were really used for camps, but both of those area's usual exp camps were totally switched up. Now Garliage and CN's usable camps are preferred Grounds of Valor camps from 30-50ish. No one bothers with the level 90-100 mobs.


And this is the reason I could never return to FFXI.

I wouldn't have the slightest clue what I was supposed to do. All my knowledge of how the game works is woefully out of date.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 60 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (60)