Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Wada ResignsFollow

#252 Mar 30 2013 at 12:20 PM Rating: Good
At the end of the day, most games that were designed as P2P models that have transitioned to F2P were games that didn't fare too well. LotRO did better under the F2P model, but I think many consider that an outlier. We simply have too much history that big budget P2P games haven't made the F2P transition well at all, either because the game was crap to begin with, or became crap afterwards. It is entirely possible that ARR will not live up to FF fans' expectations. It's also possible that Yoshi and team could knock out a home run with the reboot. However, with FFXIV: ARR being a P2P now it doesn't bode well for its F2P chances and while the P2P proponents need to accept that it is a possibility for ARR down the road, the F2P advocates need to quit thinking it will be the sure-fire silver bullet for the game also.
____________________________
Our team is like a flock of woodpeckers in a petrified forest. We just need to keep working and keep an eye open for opportunity.

FFXI
Toofar - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - WHM BLM SMN
Rafoot - Asura (Formerly of Lakshmi (Garuda)) - THF SAM BRD
#253 Mar 30 2013 at 2:33 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts


This is how my current mmo went from pay to play to free to play, if XIV went F2P with a similar system it would do nothing but good to build the game. As I said before I was against free to play myself but having experienced it first hand it really does boost the game a lot, more money for the developers and more players to do endgame content with.
____________________________
BANNED
#254 Mar 30 2013 at 2:47 PM Rating: Excellent
That looks a lot like GW2, in that once you buy the game, all of the meaningful content is free. The cash shop is for things like vanity items, keys to unlock treasure chests that you find in the game, server transfers, etc.

However, the downside to F2P is that it often causes a large influx of players, followed by a steep decline. The people who often would play for free aren't usually the players who will stick around for many years. That's why I think SE is absolutely doing the right thing by advertising FFXIV as P2P, to bring in the demographic of gamer with the income/interest to remain invested in the game for years.

I could actually see this game having microtransactions someday, but NOT being F2P. Like, a monthly subscription fee combined with optional vanity items from a cash shop would be really cool. It would be even more effective if there weren't many vanity items, which would make them more special.

EDIT: It really bothers me in GW2 that I need to buy keys with real money in order to unlock chests I collect in the game. I hope nothing like this ever appears in FFXIV.

Edited, Mar 30th 2013 1:48pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#255 Mar 30 2013 at 2:53 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
What games have experienced a decline after going F2P? Are you just pulling that out of your ****?

The dedicated Final Fantasy fanbase will stay, regardless if the game is P2P or F2P... and F2P will entice a lot of new people on top of that fanbase to try it, who may not have given the game a chance otherwise.

I don't think a decline is possible, the game was doing very poorly with its subscription model.

Edited, Mar 30th 2013 5:03pm by Killua125
#256 Mar 30 2013 at 4:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Guru
***
1,310 posts
F2P isn't necessarily a bad thing. But once it turns into a Pay-to-Win model, it's all over. Then it just becomes a game where actual skill and accomplishment is something to be by-passed by adding extra dollars to your account.

Ultimately, it's simply a last-ditch cash grab by the publisher to soak whatever money they can from whatever whales they can catch before shutting the game off for good. Maybe some people like that, but it's a 100% turn-off for me. If FFXIV goes in this direction, it's dead to me. I want to play a game, not be pressured to buy the next victory.
#257 Mar 30 2013 at 4:20 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
728 posts
I guess we have to just concede to Killua125 whom will ignore all of the 200+ posts that aren't his and still ask the same questions over and over again. F2P is better than sliced bread. the end. I'm pretty sure this topic was ended 227 posts ago but i guess not. >.> Maybe SE will make it F2P just for him.

Edited, Mar 30th 2013 6:22pm by DamienSScott
____________________________
FFXI: DamienSlvrblade Race: Elvaan Nation: San d'Oria Server: Sylph 2002-2007, Phoenix 2012
PUP WHM PLD MNK BLU BST SAM WAR BLM 99 BRD THF NIN DNC SMN RDM 50+

FFXIV: Damien Scott Race: Duskwight Elezen GC: Limsa Lominsa Server: Ultros
DoW GLA50 ACN50 PUG50 MAR 50 Rest30+
DoH/DoL All 40+
#258 Mar 30 2013 at 5:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
Avatar
**
412 posts
Xoie wrote:
F2P isn't necessarily a bad thing. But once it turns into a Pay-to-Win model, it's all over. Then it just becomes a game where actual skill and accomplishment is something to be by-passed by adding extra dollars to your account.

Ultimately, it's simply a last-ditch cash grab by the publisher to soak whatever money they can from whatever whales they can catch before shutting the game off for good. Maybe some people like that, but it's a 100% turn-off for me. If FFXIV goes in this direction, it's dead to me. I want to play a game, not be pressured to buy the next victory.


Yes, apparently all the the free to play supporters never address this. I have yet to see any of them comment on the pay to win aspect. One platitude after another. "The ignorance of free to play is quite astounding." Sure, but there are fundamental issues that will never change. I will now ignorantly type a wall o' text. I enjoy keeping things as basic as possible, as we can all relate to human behavior. People love to win, and people will even pay to make it happen. People also like shiny new things, and the feeling of being special or superior. These things will never change. I'm under this silly notion that people create business where there is a market. So if I were to spend time and finance creating a product, I'm not doing it because I'm just that sweet. In the end I want my money back, and then some. Building a business model around the petty negatives of human behavior? Why not. (Yes I know many businesses do this, but lets stick to F2P, OK?)

People are free to do whatever they want with the money they earn. However, I feel like it's irresponsible to create a product under the guise of "free", then lure people into spending real money on useless items. Free to play, but not free to enjoy unless you spend money. Yes, they don't HAVE to, nor is anyone forcing them. However, you created the situation in order to encourage said behavior. Preying on people's propensity to spend recklessly is something I frown on. This is where my own opinions and values come in. If you're going to create a game, have some integrity. Create a good product that has merit and then let people decide if they wish to spend money on it. It's called taking a risk yes, and that should give you more incentive to put everything you can into it. I know we're comfortable in expelling half *** for profit today, but I think the P2P and even B2P model are the best at keeping developers "honest." Half *** product should give you half *** profits. That commitment between the consumer and the company is important. As long as you keep delivering, I'll continue to give you a fee. It's as simple as that. There is zero need to change that. You worked hard to deliver this to me, I don't mind paying you for your work if it retains a quality to my liking.

I may or may not be alone in this, but I'm glad that SE is in the position they're in right now. I love the Final Fantasy series, but they need to learn that people don't want to spend money on crap anymore. I have faith in ARR not because of my love for the series, but because if it doesn't do well, its over. That kind of pressure has a chance of making them deliver, or crash and burn. I'm hoping for the former, not because of my love for SE, but because I want to be entertained for a prolonged period. The sate 1.0 was release in was all the proof we needed that SE stopped caring. Notice how they started charging a fee again after several patches? That's because the quality of the game went up. You notice how the legacy program encouraged you to pay for 90 days for discounts, exclusive stuff, and that special feeling? It was for the loyal fans, but I suspect that it was aimed at those people who weren't satisfied with the quality yet, but wanted to feel special later. So many flocked back to the game, not to play, but to just drop 90 day's worth for future rewards. 10 of my college friends did that. Those were the one's lucky enough to be told. There are far too many threads on non FF sites that people are still complaining about legacy. Some may even chose to not play ARR just because of that lol.

I'll reiterate, that people will dish out money for a quality product, they also hope that quality products are free, dish out money to win and get ahead, dish out money to avoid work, and also spend money to feel special. They will not typically spend money on a product that lacks quality, unless it helps them win or feel special in some way *Dat Legacy*. I'll leave it to you to figure out which business model caters to particular types of behaviors. Free to play encourages more negatives than positives. Wasting money is bad. Encouraging businesses to prey on our ever growing poor spending habits is also bad.

I'm asking any of you Free to Play supporters, would you spend money on your free to play game? If so, how much? If not, why not? You're arguing from the position, "I don't want to spend money on a sub," I don't really see you contributing financially to a free to play model. We're always looking for something free that's this huge "win." It's just not going to happen, you're going to pay for it. You can claim that there are many games that are successful. So far I have only heard of LoL(and maybe 2-3 others. That's far from "many"), and from what you people explained it to be, people pay for things that other people can put in the work in game to get (we're very predictable yea?). I wonder though, if LoL is popular because it's free, or because it's actually a quality product. If someone can answer that, I'd be grateful.
#259 Mar 30 2013 at 6:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Oh look, there's a TV Tropes for that.
____________________________
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
#260 Mar 30 2013 at 6:42 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
... that article is actually extremely forgiving. Many of the games listed as "this one's not so bad," have huge pay-to-win elements that aren't acknowledged by the writer.

You don't need to tell me that a lot of free-to-play games turn out pay-to-win because of greed (or desperation). I was just making the point that they don't have to be that way.

In other words, if XIV is announced as free-to-play, it wouldn't necessarily be the end of the world, or cause for panic... just proceed with caution and hope Square Enix doesn't mess it up.
#261 Mar 30 2013 at 6:53 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
It'd be the end of the world for me, because in all likelihood I'd quit, depending on how it was implemented. Smiley: lol
____________________________
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
#262 Mar 30 2013 at 7:06 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
That's what I mean, about "depending on how it's implemented". The introduction of free-to-play wouldn't necessarily be the killer, it would be bad implementation of free-to-play.

I would also quit if it's done badly or gives a performance advantage to higher paying users. ***** that crap.
#263 Mar 30 2013 at 7:51 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,202 posts
Seriously killua drop it, you can tell them 999999 times "Hey if SE turns XIV into a F2P there is STILL hope given SE makes the right desicions etc etc" What they read is " OMG FFXIV SUCKS FREE TO PLAY! ME NO HAVE MONEY MAKE IT FREE PLOX PLOX PLOX!" you can make a hundred sound arguments, and they will still say no, for no other reason that because of "Reasons!" Trust me, before yoshi said anything about being more mainstream, i told them thats the only way FFXIV would survive, and they would go Ape ****! But since Yoshi P said it, now they have no problem with it Smiley: lol

Also guys what he is saying actually makes sense, just because if FFXIV where to go F2P does not mean it would be the end, with the right model in place, and no B2W the game could survive and turn a profit if all else fails. He is just saying that there is no need to be all "OMFG is the END" after all we seem to forget this game went B2P once and not even free people touch it :) It could survive being F2P
____________________________
MUTED
#264 Mar 30 2013 at 8:14 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
What games have experienced a decline after going F2P? Are you just pulling that out of your ****?


It's plainly obvious with GW2 that the game has experienced a drop off since launch. If you don't actually play the game -- and I'm assuming you don't -- then it's really impossible to know, because the term "active subscribers" has no real value. However, most areas of the game are pretty empty, and everyone who I personally know who started playing at launch hasn't logging in for at least two months. I only still play because I'm determined to finish at least the minimal personal story.

I think you will find similar trends have occurred if you read about other games that go from P2P to F2P, and talk to people who have played those games. The common trend, like GW2, is a surge of new players, followed by a rapid decline over a few months as the "free" gamers move onto the next thing.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#265 Mar 30 2013 at 8:25 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
In my "pondering F2P" thread I described a F2P system that I'd probably stick with (one in which cash shops are primarily used to buy game time, rather than stuff.) That's really the only F2P thing I'd be able to stomach.
____________________________
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
#266 Mar 30 2013 at 8:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Catwho really hit this on the head with an earlier post, but I'll reiterate again here, too.

A P2P game requires a much greater effort to identify and build your game for your audience. You're not building a game for anyone with a computer and an Internet connection; you're building a game for people who enjoy Final Fantasy, and for people who would especially enjoy this very specific game you're making. And the only way a P2P model works is if the game is of a high enough quality for people to continue paying to play. Also, you don't need a million players for a P2P game to be hugely successful. You just need a dedicated core playerbase. Just look at FFXI, SE's most profitable game ever.

A F2P game doesn't have to work so hard to cater to a certain audience; what makes it most appealing to play is simply that it's free. Monetizing these games isn't about creating the most amazing content possible... rather, it's about figuring out what will sell best from the cash shop. And while starting out with non-essential cosmetic items is nice, eventually the temptation is to start tying the cash shop to the progression of the game. Businesses are not charitable organizations; they're in the business of making profits. It's simple logic that a F2P game will get more initial players, simply because it's free, and there are many teenage gamers (and casual adult gamers) who are more likely to try something that's free, rather than something they'd have to pay a subscription for.

Keep in mind, we live in an increasingly "get it for free" culture. I have too many friends who refuse to buy music or go out to see movies, because they'd rather get it for free off the Internet. This is the reason why F2P works. The most compelling reason to try the game isn't because it might be good enough to spend years playing, but because it's free to try.

So, at this point, I am VERY glad that Yoshi-P is sticking to his guns about FFXIV being a P2P game. That makes me much more confident about not only the quality of ARR, but also the kind of game they envision it being.

As far as what the future holds? Today I was puttering around in Guild Wars 2, and I finally realized that the people I've seen with flaming swords didn't get those items from dungeons, but from the cash shop. Through the shop, you can buy weapon skins to make any weapon you have look more epic. It really made me upset. All this time, I've been wondering which mission or dungeon people got these weapons from, and wondering why I hadn't come across one yet. Silly me, for thinking that such cool things could be earned through my achievements in the game!

Edited, Mar 30th 2013 7:33pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#267 Mar 30 2013 at 10:19 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
9,997 posts
Quote:
This is a miscomception that i have heard around here a few times, balancing is easy is just numbers etc etc, yet two of the most successful companys have had always problems as far as balancing classes, one is blizzard with it's PVP, and the other one is Legue of Legends, entierly different companys in different genres, with the same problem, i would think if it was as easy as tweaking a number here and there, they would have ridden themselfs of such problems a long time ago, yet every new update from both companys brings fixes and buffs or nerfs to their content in order to balance classes. They are professional programers with what i would think is an infinite more experience than some random posters in some board, and they have not been able to fix this "Easy" balancing problem.... Hmm! Maybe it is not as easy as adding one number here and subtracting another there ?


Your reasoning is that if it were easy, they would have already done it. There are a number of reasons why developers wouldn't fix balance issues (not especially GOOD reasons, though). First of all, it's only -easy- if you know what you're doing. Like many skills--people who know what they're doing make it look easy, people who don't make it look impossible. Most MMO designers don't know what they're doing, unfortunately. There might be one or two guys somewhere going, "Hey, we really need to fix the balance with these adjustments," but they don't have executive authority to make those adjustments. They're part of a team that's sitting around going, "Maybe," "I don't think that's the REAL problem," or "Let's just wait and see."

Even if you have someone who knows what they're doing, they have to do the research and pull the numbers. A game like LoL may have tier lists where players have decided which characters are great and which are awful, but those are often only with respect to highly skilled players. You really can't balance that many characters across every different skill level across every possible matchup (WoW doesn't have this problem/excuse). With that, a lot of developers are content to shrug their shoulders and say, "Skill still matters the most," "They're balanced for AVERAGE players," or "Let's just wait and see."

It really is as easy as adding a number here and subtracting a number there. That's how you balance things. In fact, that's the ONLY way you balance things. It's getting the numbers -right- that is the most difficult part, and the way you do that is to keep tinkering. Unfortunately, that's a lot of work! It requires constant assessment, tuning, and reassessment. And it's not as fun as designing new features, nor does conventional wisdom portray it as a good selling point. The new housing system is something you can sell to players... newly adjusted statistics isn't quite trailer-worthy.

So, lots of reasons why designers don't fix balance problems. Again, not good reasons. And difficulty isn't one of them. You gauge the community and respond to their perceptions (even if their perceptions are wrong).
____________________________
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.
#268 Mar 30 2013 at 10:34 PM Rating: Good
****
4,134 posts
DamienSScott wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I wouldn't exactly call F2P a cash grab. That term implies that you're trying to generate a quick profit and sacrificing the longevity of the product to do so. Many F2P models do generate profit quickly yes, but that also sets them up in a better position to funnel some of that profit back into the game and I would argue that this would bolster the sustained profit through having more funds to develop and implement more content. Seems more like a matter of player preference to me.


The problem is.. other than League of Legends no F2P game pumps out content anywhere near as fast as WoW. Pretty much every small F2P game is a cash grab with little content and a pay to win attitude. With as little as these companies comparatively spent on game development they probably make great profit. However you never see any content updates, or if you do it's after 3-5 years. I played a blatant WoW-clone called Fiesta off and on for 3+ years and they never released anything new other than cash shop garbage. Guild Wars 2 has been out for 6+ months and still hasn't released any new content either. This is a game where you could get to max level in a week or less with no end game content. F2P looks nice on paper but it just doesn't work that way.


When did WoW go F2P? The comparison doesn't make sense because WoW charges more than 10 million people a subscription fee. With that kind of income it's easy to see how they are able to manufacture so much content. That does lead me to the point that Blizzard switched their development model to be able to introduce content faster. Rather than having huge raids with tons of bosses, they instead broke them into smaller sized instances and shortened the window of the releases for each progressive raid. Essentially you end up getting the same amount of content, but it's not all front loaded and doesn't lead to the quick burnout that it used to.

6 months is not a long time to be without a content update. I don't play GW2, but I know that they have introduced (what seems like to me anyway) a lot in the way of tweaks, adjustments and improvements. IIRC they just released something days ago. I have no idea what it is or what it entails, but I wouldn't expect a newly released game to even mention an expansion for at least that long.

The model works when it's implemented properly. The game you mentioned with max level in a week and no end game content doesn't sound like it would have been successful anyway; lets not attribute flaws that are obviously unrelated to the business model.
____________________________
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.
#269 Mar 31 2013 at 7:12 AM Rating: Default
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,659 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
DamienSScott wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I wouldn't exactly call F2P a cash grab. That term implies that you're trying to generate a quick profit and sacrificing the longevity of the product to do so. Many F2P models do generate profit quickly yes, but that also sets them up in a better position to funnel some of that profit back into the game and I would argue that this would bolster the sustained profit through having more funds to develop and implement more content. Seems more like a matter of player preference to me.


The problem is.. other than League of Legends no F2P game pumps out content anywhere near as fast as WoW. Pretty much every small F2P game is a cash grab with little content and a pay to win attitude. With as little as these companies comparatively spent on game development they probably make great profit. However you never see any content updates, or if you do it's after 3-5 years. I played a blatant WoW-clone called Fiesta off and on for 3+ years and they never released anything new other than cash shop garbage. Guild Wars 2 has been out for 6+ months and still hasn't released any new content either. This is a game where you could get to max level in a week or less with no end game content. F2P looks nice on paper but it just doesn't work that way.


When did WoW go F2P? The comparison doesn't make sense because WoW charges more than 10 million people a subscription fee. With that kind of income it's easy to see how they are able to manufacture so much content.


Now the question is..how much of that content is actually GOOD content?
#270 Mar 31 2013 at 7:53 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
**
554 posts

Theonehio wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
DamienSScott wrote:
FilthMcNasty wrote:
I wouldn't exactly call F2P a cash grab. That term implies that you're trying to generate a quick profit and sacrificing the longevity of the product to do so. Many F2P models do generate profit quickly yes, but that also sets them up in a better position to funnel some of that profit back into the game and I would argue that this would bolster the sustained profit through having more funds to develop and implement more content. Seems more like a matter of player preference to me.


The problem is.. other than League of Legends no F2P game pumps out content anywhere near as fast as WoW. Pretty much every small F2P game is a cash grab with little content and a pay to win attitude. With as little as these companies comparatively spent on game development they probably make great profit. However you never see any content updates, or if you do it's after 3-5 years. I played a blatant WoW-clone called Fiesta off and on for 3+ years and they never released anything new other than cash shop garbage. Guild Wars 2 has been out for 6+ months and still hasn't released any new content either. This is a game where you could get to max level in a week or less with no end game content. F2P looks nice on paper but it just doesn't work that way.


When did WoW go F2P? The comparison doesn't make sense because WoW charges more than 10 million people a subscription fee. With that kind of income it's easy to see how they are able to manufacture so much content.


Now the question is..how much of that content is actually GOOD content?


Uh... apparently good enough to keep 10 million people around...

How many people dose FFXI keep around Theonehio?
#271 Mar 31 2013 at 7:55 AM Rating: Excellent
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
Considering those 10 million people are still paying a $15 monthly fee, I'd say it has to be fairly good content.
____________________________
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
#272 Mar 31 2013 at 8:03 AM Rating: Excellent
Think WoW keeps so many people around simply because so many people play it. It has a critical mass that no other game is likely to have again. Never underestimate the power of the friend effect.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#273 Mar 31 2013 at 8:36 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
I think you guys are in for a shock when this game launches, p2p games lose a vast amount of its players after the first month these days, what you call a "huge dropoff" isn't a f2p thing it's an MMO thing. Players have almost no patience to wait on content these days.

I think as fans of the game you aren't doing a favour to it by thinking F2P is the end of the world when it could be the thing that ends up saving it, major thing is that many that would possibly like the game, pay money into it and play it won't even give it a chance if they don't embrace f2p. This game is not really in a strong position here.

These days huge chunks of players leave after the first month and many more won't buy a game at launch at all to try and starve F2P on the devs. It's not simply about having investors to pay back, it's does the game have enough players to even sustain itself after the first month or two. Most games just lose so many players they have to think of a way to bring in more to make the game even work.

Oh and GW2 isn't free to play and WoW has free to play till level 20 now doesn't it?

Edited, Mar 31st 2013 10:39am by preludes
____________________________
BANNED
#274 Mar 31 2013 at 8:38 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
preludes wrote:
I think you guys are in for a shock when this game launches, p2p games lose a vast amount of its players after the first month these days, what you call a "huge dropoff" isn't a f2p thing it's an MMO thing. Players have almost no patience to wait on content these days.

I think as fans of the game you aren't doing a favour to it by thinking F2P is the end of the world when it could be the thing that ends up saving it, major thing is that many that would possibly like the game, pay money into it and play it won't even give it a chance if they don't embrace f2p. This game is not really in a strong position here.

These days huge chunks of players leave after the first month and many more won't buy a game at launch at all to try and starve F2P on the devs. It's not simply about having investors to pay back, it's does the game have enough players to even sustain itself after the first month or two. Most games just lose so many players they have to think of a way to bring in more to make the game even work.

Edited, Mar 31st 2013 10:37am by preludes


And I think you're underestimating the fanbase.
____________________________
"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
#275 Mar 31 2013 at 8:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Wint wrote:
And I think you're underestimating the fanbase.


I think you overestimate it, the FF brand isn't what it was and MMO players aren't as forgiving as they used to be.

If what you say was true V1 would of never failed as incredibly hard as it did, Square thought as you did and look where that got them.
____________________________
BANNED
#276 Mar 31 2013 at 8:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Anterograde Amnesia
Avatar
*****
12,363 posts
I guess we'll see who is right won't we?
____________________________
"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
#277 Mar 31 2013 at 9:11 AM Rating: Excellent
Sage
Avatar
*
131 posts
FFXI still got a pretty solid base of players playing the game :P And I doubt that FF14 will be any different, actually I'm pretty convinced that FF14 will do way better than FFXI, and as long they keep a solid 500k subs then the game will do fine in the long run.

Players who leave after a month or two from a P2P MMO wont (In most cases) not contribute with anything of worth if the game went F2P since they couldn't be bother to pay a small sub fee, because if they really thought the game was good enough then they wouldn't mind paying those 12-14$ a month. Cheers
#278 Mar 31 2013 at 9:15 AM Rating: Good
Sage
Avatar
*
131 posts
Why are we still arguing about the F2P vs P2P model in this thread? :P F2P won't happen, if they wanted it, then FFXI would already be F2P :P

What about we leave the dead horse and stops beating on it? :P
#279 Mar 31 2013 at 9:29 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*
82 posts
abesut wrote:
Why are we still arguing about the F2P vs P2P model in this thread? :P F2P won't happen, if they wanted it, then FFXI would already be F2P :P

What about we leave the dead horse and stops beating on it? :P


This argument comes up about every other week. I suppose it's something to just pass the time with until we get more news.
____________________________
FFXIV - Goblin - Seraphan Amatsuka
#280Killua125, Posted: Mar 31 2013 at 9:29 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) That's incorrect. Square Enix would change FFXI to a free-to-play with microtransactions model if they could, this has been said by Wada himself.
#281 Mar 31 2013 at 9:57 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
2,153 posts
Quote:
They just can't implement the necessary systems (like an in-game cash shop) due to "PS2 limitations".

I <3 PS3 limitations.
#282 Mar 31 2013 at 10:14 AM Rating: Excellent
After buying the initial game, then yes, Guild Wars 2 is f2p.

On a side note, I am very much not impressed with the new XI expansion. I know that isn't really relevant here, but I needed to vent.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#283 Mar 31 2013 at 10:24 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
Care to explain? I'm guessing it's OK if we go off-topic somewhat since FFXIV is under NDA right now anyway.

I haven't played FFXI since the cap was 75, the Abyssea stuff and all the changes were just a bit too foreign to me so I never hopped back in.
#284 Mar 31 2013 at 10:37 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Thayos wrote:
After buying the initial game, then yes, Guild Wars 2 is f2p.

On a side note, I am very much not impressed with the new XI expansion. I know that isn't really relevant here, but I needed to vent.


Free to play means you pay nothing at all, Guild wars 2 is buy to play. You have to buy the game for $60 (and you have to buy future expansion packs), there is no version of GW2 that you can play unless you put money down.
____________________________
BANNED
#285 Mar 31 2013 at 10:52 AM Rating: Good
******
48,494 posts
preludes wrote:
Free to play means you pay nothing at all, Guild wars 2 is buy to play. You have to buy the game for $60 (and you have to buy future expansion packs), there is no version of GW2 that you can play unless you put money down.
That's a needlessly childish argument. There is no version of any game you can play unless you put money down, whether it be the software, a system to play it on, or an internet connection of some sort. You have to buy a Monopoly board before you can play, but no one is going to argue that it's a Pay to Play game.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#286 Mar 31 2013 at 10:56 AM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
You have to buy a Monopoly board before you can play, but no one is going to argue that it's a Pay to Play game.


Yeah, because it's Buy to Play.


Edited, Mar 31st 2013 12:57pm by Killua125
#287 Mar 31 2013 at 10:58 AM Rating: Excellent
******
48,494 posts
Killua125 wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
You have to buy a Monopoly board before you can play, but no one is going to argue that it's a Pay to Play game.
Yeah,
I'm glad you agree. I can ignore the bulk of a post to try to make a point, too. I'm probably better at it as well.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#288 Mar 31 2013 at 11:06 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
972 posts
I was making a joke.

Anyway,

F2P lets you download and play for free.
B2P requires a flat cost before you can play.
P2P requires a subscription of some sort.

Guild Wars wouldn't qualify as F2P because you pay for the game before you can play.

I mean, everything costs money if we're talking about the hardware to play it on, but I think the terminology is specifically referring to the payment models of the game.

Edited, Mar 31st 2013 1:07pm by Killua125
#289 Mar 31 2013 at 11:49 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
Quote:
That's a needlessly childish argument. There is no version of any game you can play unless you put money down, whether it be the software, a system to play it on, or an internet connection of some sort. You have to buy a Monopoly board before you can play, but no one is going to argue that it's a Pay to Play game.


If I want to play SWTOR I can download it and I can play it and have paid nothing at all. There is no outlay at all, if I don't like it so what I paid nothing anyway.

If I want to play GW2 I have to pay $60, if I don't like it I wasted $60.

Free to play means free, you can't call something free if you have to pay the creators $60 for it. It's not even 1 charge to play because the whole idea of the game is to continnue to keep buying expansion packs for as long as they support the game, in effect it's $60 + however many expansions they bring out.

It's black and white, it's either free or it's not free.

Honestly, if I had to bet money on it I would say they will add a cash shop during p2p with vanity pets and cosmetics and then go free to play (with optional sub) within the first year and then offer the proper cash shop stuff like XP boosts etc.
____________________________
BANNED
#290 Mar 31 2013 at 12:21 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,659 posts
Killua125 wrote:
abesut wrote:
if they wanted it, then FFXI would already be F2P :P


That's incorrect. Square Enix would change FFXI to a free-to-play with microtransactions model if they could, this has been said by Wada himself.

They just can't implement the necessary systems (like an in-game cash shop) due to "PS2 limitations".


Funny, considering they're offering the ability to buy the Collection items separate from actually buying the content itself. The system is in place, they're just not going to overhaul the game the support a F2P style gameplay.

#291 Mar 31 2013 at 12:37 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,530 posts
Regarding the sale of vanity items (which many people seem to accept, now that other games have been doing it for a few years):

An MMORPG is about experiencing a large, persistent world, about being able to create a character and craft items, fight monsters, team up with friends, and become part of a story. We can say that an MMORPG, especially in the case of FFXIV, is about living an adventurer's life in all its variety and splendour.

Given that a large part of living in the world is about wearing and discovering unique equipment, forging armour, and generally just collecting stuff, how can it be said that cosmetic/vanity items are not part of the gameplay? I know that I would rather collect an assortment of sordid gobbie ingredients and have a friend sign a special Goblin Mask for me than to enter my credit card number and buy it for $5. Yet those are the two options that we're now facing -- live the life or swipe the card.

Having even vanity items for sale does impact the game; it may not alter one's numerical values, but it certainly removes a level of variety, it certainly robs the world of recipes, rewards, and extras that could have fleshed it out all the better.

This doesn't apply to XIV (yet), but the fact that a company would ever be so brazen as to try and charge someone both a subscription fee and a "cosmetic fee" shows a certain degree of greed in the company -- and gullibility in the customers -- that they could ever abide such a thing.
____________________________
"... he called to himself a wizard, named Gallery, hoping by this means to escape the paying of the fifteen hundred crowns..." (Machen 15)

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

"I could only read so much for this paper and the syphilis poem had to go."
#292 Mar 31 2013 at 1:01 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
2,045 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
Regarding the sale of vanity items (which many people seem to accept, now that other games have been doing it for a few years):

An MMORPG is about experiencing a large, persistent world, about being able to create a character and craft items, fight monsters, team up with friends, and become part of a story. We can say that an MMORPG, especially in the case of FFXIV, is about living an adventurer's life in all its variety and splendour.

Given that a large part of living in the world is about wearing and discovering unique equipment, forging armour, and generally just collecting stuff, how can it be said that cosmetic/vanity items are not part of the gameplay? I know that I would rather collect an assortment of sordid gobbie ingredients and have a friend sign a special Goblin Mask for me than to enter my credit card number and buy it for $5. Yet those are the two options that we're now facing -- live the life or swipe the card.

Having even vanity items for sale does impact the game; it may not alter one's numerical values, but it certainly removes a level of variety, it certainly robs the world of recipes, rewards, and extras that could have fleshed it out all the better.

This doesn't apply to XIV (yet), but the fact that a company would ever be so brazen as to try and charge someone both a subscription fee and a "cosmetic fee" shows a certain degree of greed in the company -- and gullibility in the customers -- that they could ever abide such a thing.


Quote:
MASSIVE AMBITIONS
Beyond that, though, comes PS3 MMO FFXIV. It’s not Square Enix’s first such game – it successfully run FFXI on PS2, Xbox 360 and PC over the last six years, but it was outshone by World of Warcraft, the genre’s posterboy.

Yet come next year Square Enix will be having to fight not just Blizzard, but also EA, LucasArts, Atari and others claiming to have the next big MMO.

Wada won’t rock the boat too much, though – the shrewd accountant in him says the business model for FFXIV will be the now-traditional mix of subscriptions and item transactions, plus sales of the game on disc.
“The basic model hasn’t changed.” But he says the firm has learnt lessons.

“In our first MMO we didn’t set up the transaction model that well. We thought that it would be a benefit for users, but that we wouldn’t have to charge. We soon learnt that there are a lot of people who want that kind of model, so we would like to introduce more pay-as-you-use items into the game.”

As the industry gears up for that new wave of MMOs, Wada sees an opportunity: He reckons that when WoW players look to switch, it won’t necessarily be to another Blizzard MMO.

“WoW is a tough competitor – they are very good. But whether you are talking about EverQuest, Ultima or Lineage there has never been a company that has continuously had the successful number one and two MMOs,” he says.


http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/wada-s-vision
____________________________
BANNED
#293 Mar 31 2013 at 1:45 PM Rating: Excellent
I think that B2P designation is a little bit of a stretch. It's either P2P or it's F2P, and Guild Wars 2 is certainly not P2P. It has a cash shop, and there are no monthly fees.

I think a game can be both B2P and F2P, or B2P and P2P. They're apples and oranges, really. When people debate the merits of F2P vs. P2P, they're talking about how the game will make money over time -- with either monthly fees or some kind of cash shop -- not whether they need to pay one time to buy the game.

And regarding FFXI, here's a short list of what's wrong with it, based on my limited experience (partially due to boredom):

- There is no journey to the new areas; you warp there from Jeuno.
- The new city is huge, but its design is kind of bland, and there is a surprising lack of NPCs for what is supposed to be a booming metropolis.
- The two areas right outside the city are total maze layouts... think v 1.0 Black Shroud.
- The "campaign" event of this expansion are these battles called Reives, but they're impossible to do solo, and even small groups have trouble... they happen in very small areas, and if you back up even just a few steps, you get a five-second countdown (and it's a FAST countdown, so more like three seconds) before you're ejected from the fight with a 10-minute cooldown before rejoining. This makes it impossible for mages to cast or rest MP from out of harm's way... these things are almost unplayable as blm.
- These reives don't show up on the map... so to find one, you've got to just run around this big, mazey area and hope to find one with enough other people there so that you can actually do it.

Although having new zones/new city is nice, it just seems like there is very little to do compared to the launches of previous expansions. I'm hoping that SE is getting ready to patch in some new content relatively soon, because I was really looking forward to using Seekers as a chance to get back into FFXI.

EDIT: On the bright side, my lack of interest in the FFXI expansion motivated me to play GW2 yesterday, in which I hit level 77. Almost to cap, ha.


Edited, Mar 31st 2013 12:47pm by Thayos
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#294 Mar 31 2013 at 1:53 PM Rating: Default
Avatar
**
972 posts
Looking at the city right now. I immediately noticed exactly what you said about the few NPCs... it looks very barren for its size.

I guess the biggest part of this expansion is supposed to be the new jobs, but I hear from people who have already capped them that they are very underwhelming.
#295 Mar 31 2013 at 3:26 PM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
So far Geo is like playing BRD/BLM only instead of playing a harp or a horn, I'm ringing a bell.
____________________________
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
#296 Mar 31 2013 at 3:47 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
728 posts
FilthMcNasty wrote:
DamienSScott wrote:
The problem is.. other than League of Legends no F2P game pumps out content anywhere near as fast as WoW. Pretty much every small F2P game is a cash grab with little content and a pay to win attitude. With as little as these companies comparatively spent on game development they probably make great profit. However you never see any content updates, or if you do it's after 3-5 years. I played a blatant WoW-clone called Fiesta off and on for 3+ years and they never released anything new other than cash shop garbage. Guild Wars 2 has been out for 6+ months and still hasn't released any new content either. This is a game where you could get to max level in a week or less with no end game content. F2P looks nice on paper but it just doesn't work that way.


When did WoW go F2P? The comparison doesn't make sense because WoW charges more than 10 million people a subscription fee. With that kind of income it's easy to see how they are able to manufacture so much content. That does lead me to the point that Blizzard switched their development model to be able to introduce content faster. Rather than having huge raids with tons of bosses, they instead broke them into smaller sized instances and shortened the window of the releases for each progressive raid. Essentially you end up getting the same amount of content, but it's not all front loaded and doesn't lead to the quick burnout that it used to.

6 months is not a long time to be without a content update. I don't play GW2, but I know that they have introduced (what seems like to me anyway) a lot in the way of tweaks, adjustments and improvements. IIRC they just released something days ago. I have no idea what it is or what it entails, but I wouldn't expect a newly released game to even mention an expansion for at least that long.

The model works when it's implemented properly. The game you mentioned with max level in a week and no end game content doesn't sound like it would have been successful anyway; lets not attribute flaws that are obviously unrelated to the business model.


My apologies, I had assumed that anyone reading this thread would know that WoW was a subscription based game. I shall try to be sure to flesh out any and all of my ideas lest they arbitrarily be used against my main point. I won't debate WoW's business model and you are most likely correct in your assumptions about it I may not like the game, but their model works, and I like it. When I did play it was nice to have new content always coming out even after I bought a huge expansion. It has probably changed in the last couple years but if i recall they released plenty of new content in Vanilla and even part way through WotLK.

GW2 did indeed have a rather beefy patch recently, but as a player that struggles to hold interest in the game I didn't really see any changes. Well I did notice at some point they lowered the cost of those stupidly overpriced skill books but that's pretty much it. Also, the game that I mentioned was GW2. it has no end game content and it is very easy to level up. You hit 80 and all you have left to do is farm for a set of armor and a legendary weapon. These may in fact be the game's flaws and not the F2P model's fault, but this model does not lend itself to correcting said flaws as quickly and easily as P2P can. Plus with the whole massive influx at launch and then massive exodus a few months later this probably makes developers wonder what the point would be in rushing out more content.

To flip in some of the F2P mentality, MMO companies are going to have to start thinking like WoW when it comes to releasing content if they have any hopes to keep people playing. In this age that causes everyone to be all about the "OMG CAN I HAS NAO FRE FRE FRE!" those customers are going to need that constant trickle of new stuff to do and rightly so. I don't think that a F2P MMO in this day and age will be prepared to supply that I.V. drip like a P2P could. I think FFXIV is on the right track to at least be competent in the new market with the way they handled 1.0 updates and patches. 6 months to 2 years may have been an acceptable time to wait for an expansion in the past, but today (as the F2Pers love to say), people expect more. I would be pretty mad if I was a serious PvE GW2 player and was told I would have to wait a year or more for another expansion I had to pay for to get end game content.
____________________________
FFXI: DamienSlvrblade Race: Elvaan Nation: San d'Oria Server: Sylph 2002-2007, Phoenix 2012
PUP WHM PLD MNK BLU BST SAM WAR BLM 99 BRD THF NIN DNC SMN RDM 50+

FFXIV: Damien Scott Race: Duskwight Elezen GC: Limsa Lominsa Server: Ultros
DoW GLA50 ACN50 PUG50 MAR 50 Rest30+
DoH/DoL All 40+
#297 Mar 31 2013 at 4:34 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
Avatar
*****
12,659 posts
Killua125 wrote:
Looking at the city right now. I immediately noticed exactly what you said about the few NPCs... it looks very barren for its size.

I guess the biggest part of this expansion is supposed to be the new jobs, but I hear from people who have already capped them that they are very underwhelming.


If I burned BLU from 30-99 it would be pretty **** underwhelming as well.
#298 Mar 31 2013 at 10:37 PM Rating: Default
25 posts
regarding the f2p and p2p... not to sound mean or anything but i don't really think SE cares that much about what the legacy members think because they need more players for the game to succeed, for now i think they look at legacy members as "insurance" because you still played and payed for the game but they obviously still need more people to pay and play the game which is why they are redesigning everything so if they do get the audience they want then i highly doubt that they will care about your opinions anymore and it will just be the majority. Thats just the way i see it and i know legacy members are gonna be pretty upset since they just feel as though its their game to defend
#299 Mar 31 2013 at 11:25 PM Rating: Excellent
Quote:
Thats just the way i see it and i know legacy members are gonna be pretty upset since they just feel as though its their game to defend


I don't think most Legacy members would feel offended or slighted by the game going F2P. Keep in mind, FFXIV v1.x was free for a very long time... there weren't any subscription fees until after a trio of very large patches that revamped several systems, added content and really raised the quality of the game to be something worth paying for. At that point, FFXIV was a game actually worth its monthly fee. Those who chose to play during v1.x were also given the unique, end-of-the-world storyline that will never be repeated... we basically got an exclusive Final Fantasy game that no one else will ever know.

If the game does go F2P someday, then yeah, a lot of people will be really upset, but not because SE owes us anything. We're all grown ups, and we choose to spend our money however we want to. We were never asked to pay until the game was up to par.
____________________________
Thayos Redblade
Jormungandr
Hyperion
#300 Apr 01 2013 at 2:57 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
**
412 posts
ThadCastle wrote:
regarding the f2p and p2p... not to sound mean or anything but i don't really think SE cares that much about what the legacy members think because they need more players for the game to succeed, for now i think they look at legacy members as "insurance" because you still played and payed for the game but they obviously still need more people to pay and play the game which is why they are redesigning everything so if they do get the audience they want then i highly doubt that they will care about your opinions anymore and it will just be the majority. Thats just the way i see it and i know legacy members are gonna be pretty upset since they just feel as though its their game to defend


So you just mentioned the topic at hand, then digressed into... I don't know. Not to sound sarcastic or anything, but you are very very mean, and I don't appreciate it. Only meanies forget things. The redesigning was a collaboration between the players who stuck around, and Yoshi studying what works in terms of popular MMOs. It was always his call. You have an interesting perspective. Just because it'll make you happy, I'll let you know how thoroughly upset I am by your statements, even though I don't know what I'm defending.

You're better off not being legacy, it's a burden only a few can bear. Smiley: jester

Ah well, spring break's over, off to complete Monday.
#301 Apr 01 2013 at 9:06 AM Rating: Good
Needs More Smut
******
21,262 posts
In this whole P2P vs F2P argument I completely forgot I was Legacy. Smiley: laugh I was totally prepared to pay $15 a month, in fact.

Legacy vs non Legacy has no bearing on my preference. SE gets $18 a month for my FFXI account already. I've paid that fee month in and month out because it's the cheapest entertainment value I can get outside of piracy.
____________________________
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
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 68 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (68)