314 réponses à ce sujet

[cedgedc]

plokoon9619 wrote...

Eledhan wrote...

The top 5 issues I hear that are in opposition to a Mass Effect MMO are as follows:

1) MEO (my personal name for the hypothetical game, "Mass Effect Online") would compete with SWTOR for profits, thereby hurting Bioware's success in the MMO genre.

2) I love ME because it's a single player game with a great story! I don't want other players to mess up my experience in game, or my story!

3) MMO's are nothing but grinding time-sinks.

4) It's been done before.

5) Current systems cannot handle a game of the same porformance caliber as ME2 (and I assume 3) with multiplayer.

______________________________________________

In response to the above...

1) MEO would not be released ONLY on PC. It would be designed with both consoles and computers in mind. As a matter of fact, I don't see how anyone could enjoy playing the game on PC (I'm a fan of both PC and consoles, btw...I play action/shooter/strategy games on both types of systems). There is no reason why a game like this couldn't perform just fine on a console. Due to this fact, MEO would NOT be in competition with TOR simply because the target audience is broader, or perhaps even a different audience all-together.

2) I would recommend you check out guildwars2.com for some fabulous information about how they don't want to make the "same MMO everyone else is making." They HATE traditional MMO ideas...if they can do it with their game, then Bioware can, too. Not to mention...Bioware has already showed significant promise in how they are handling story in TOR. Basically, in GW2, players will still have their own story, similar to ME, but can CHOOSE whether to bring their friends along. THEN...they still have the option to free-roam in the world and do whatever they please.

3) Again, I'll refer you to the GW2 link above. There's so much info in their blog and other posts all throughout their site, that if you aren't convinced that you will rarely, if ever, feel like you have to "slay 20 mudcrabs" in their game, then I don't know what to tell you. There's nothing preventing this kind of thing from taking place in any other kind of MMO....PERIOD. It's time for gamers of all kinds to wake up to the rising sun that is dynamic content in MMO's.

4) This kind of game has NEVER been done before. If it has, please provide a link with proof. You need a Third Person Shooter MMORPG set in the future, using a phenomenal game universe for its setting, containing excellent solo story as well as open-world, exploratory gameplay. AND...it needs to be playable on a console.

5) I agree that current systems couldn't handle a game of this nature. But why would anyone bring this up? It is common knowledge to those who track MMO's that development time is roughly 5 years for a triple A MMO title. 5 Years from now, we'll be looking at a new system from Microsoft, and possibly even one from Sony as well. In my opinion, the improvements in hardware tech are so far beyond even where the 360 and PS3 are currently at, we could theoretically have a new system now, but the market simply wouldn't bear it. The bottom line is...MEO would be designed for whatever new systems (and PC's if they decide to do multi-platform concepts) are released in the next 5 years or so.

If someone can explain how those 5 points are still issues after reading my responses, I'd love to hear their thoughts.

But as far as I'm concerned, a ME MMO would be simply awesome!

It would fail if released to both consoles and PC, they have to limit their ideas, graphics, etc to be workable on the console, plus 360 is already out because of Microsoft wanting money placed on anything that is released after the game such as updates... Look at the DC MMORPG, it would be incredibly simplified.

I'll take this one Eledhan lol.

This wouldn't be released for 360. More likely in 5+ years when the MMO could be produced, it would be released for the.. 720 (or whatever microsoft comes out with next) and the ps4. Furthermore, ME2 graphics were just fine. ME 3 im sure will be a bit better. Those graphics are already more impressive than the majority of most MMO'.s Graphic limitations are not an issue.

And a third person shooter would play just as easily on pc as on console. Platform issues should not be a problem.

[stu117]

Do it bioware! do IT!!!!! do it for the......money!/other stuff

[Eledhan]

cedgedc wrote...

plokoon9619 wrote...

It would fail if released to both consoles and PC, they have to limit their ideas, graphics, etc to be workable on the console, plus 360 is already out because of Microsoft wanting money placed on anything that is released after the game such as updates... Look at the DC MMORPG, it would be incredibly simplified.

I'll take this one Eledhan lol.

This wouldn't be released for 360. More likely in 5+ years when the MMO could be produced, it would be released for the.. 720 (or whatever microsoft comes out with next) and the ps4. Furthermore, ME2 graphics were just fine. ME 3 im sure will be a bit better. Those graphics are already more impressive than the majority of most MMO'.s Graphic limitations are not an issue.

And a third person shooter would play just as easily on pc as on console. Platform issues should not be a problem.

Key point...

THIS GAME WOULD NOT BE FOR 360

It'll be for the next generation of consoles...which will (more likely than not) be streamlined, mass-produced computers with high-end, powerful components. I'm not talking like the measly 360 and PS3...I'm talking we should be playing on high performance pc's that are designed for mass-production and only for gaming.

With hardware like that, pretty much any game is possible. The only limit will be the developer's imaginations and initiative.

Good points, cedgedc...where were you when I had my original MMO thread over a year ago?

[Catalyst38]

Dear god no..... I'm so sick of every good single player game becoming a fail mmo. I'm questioning kotor enough Lats not have a ME MMO as well. Plus if Bioware is anything like blizzard once kotor launches we won't see another single play game for years.

[CroGamer002]

^I don't remember any singleplayer game that become MMO but Final Fantasy 14.

Sure TOR is coming soon, but I doubt it's gonna fail.

[Deltateam Elcor]

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

[Eledhan]

Catalyst38 wrote...

Dear god no..... I'm so sick of every good single player game becoming a fail mmo. I'm questioning kotor enough Lats not have a ME MMO as well. Plus if Bioware is anything like blizzard once kotor launches we won't see another single play game for years.

Do you not understand the concept of a properly done MMO?

I'm with you on the part about not making ME into a FAIL mmo, but come on...

There's actually a lot of promising MMO's coming in the next year or two.

[Eledhan]

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

MEO would be an RPG/Shooter.........

You would just be able to do additional stuff with others in a more open world.

Why do people not understand this?

MMO's as we know them are soon to be a thing of the past. Wait and see.

[Deltateam Elcor]

Eledhan wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

MEO would be an RPG/Shooter.........

You would just be able to do additional stuff with others in a more open world.

Why do people not understand this?

MMO's as we know them are soon to be a thing of the past. Wait and see.

Considering the best system for an MMO has so far been a subscription, no it wont change.

I really hate Microtransations because how do you put a value on virtual items, without alienating alot of people?

[cedgedc]

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Eledhan wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

MEO would be an RPG/Shooter.........

You would just be able to do additional stuff with others in a more open world.

Why do people not understand this?

MMO's as we know them are soon to be a thing of the past. Wait and see.

Considering the best system for an MMO has so far been a subscription, no it wont change.

I really hate Microtransations because how do you put a value on virtual items, without alienating alot of people?

Microtransactions are not a solution. Then it turns the game into, 'he who spends the most rl cash has the biggest advantage.' No one likes that. It generally turns players off.

[Creator001]

Ha ha ha Go Sleep somewhere.
What do you say about EVE and WOW ? Rift ?

If ME will eventualy becom MMORPG. I would like it to ne somewhere in between GlobalAgenda and WOW

[Creator001]

In that case they would be the 1st ...

[Eledhan]

cedgedc wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Eledhan wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

MEO would be an RPG/Shooter.........

You would just be able to do additional stuff with others in a more open world.

Why do people not understand this?

MMO's as we know them are soon to be a thing of the past. Wait and see.

Considering the best system for an MMO has so far been a subscription, no it wont change.

I really hate Microtransations because how do you put a value on virtual items, without alienating alot of people?

Microtransactions are not a solution. Then it turns the game into, 'he who spends the most rl cash has the biggest advantage.' No one likes that. It generally turns players off.

I have 3 words for you...

Well, really...it's 2 words and a number....you ready?

GUILD WARS 2


No microtransactions for anything related to game performance or balancing. Man, I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the coffee...

[cedgedc]

Eledhan wrote...

cedgedc wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Eledhan wrote...

Deltateam Elcor wrote...

Id rather the mass effect team focus on the RPG/Shooter genre to be honest.

MEO would be an RPG/Shooter.........

You would just be able to do additional stuff with others in a more open world.

Why do people not understand this?

MMO's as we know them are soon to be a thing of the past. Wait and see.

Considering the best system for an MMO has so far been a subscription, no it wont change.

I really hate Microtransations because how do you put a value on virtual items, without alienating alot of people?

Microtransactions are not a solution. Then it turns the game into, 'he who spends the most rl cash has the biggest advantage.' No one likes that. It generally turns players off.

I have 3 words for you...

Well, really...it's 2 words and a number....you ready?

GUILD WARS 2


No microtransactions for anything related to game performance or balancing. Man, I can't wait for people to wake up and smell the coffee...

Listing a game which has yet to prove itself isn't really a valid arguement. I am right with you in hoping that GW2 will be a great game and a success.

I am not so much with you in believing it will be, however. I think it has the potential, but we will see. Many games which switch to the micro transaction model often find themselves offering perks which eventually do ammount to an advantage in game play.

What happens if they launch and find that not everyone wants to spend 5 bucks on a pet or funky hat? What if they find themselves in the possition of having to offer more compelling rewards.. different classes, items etc..

It could very well be that it will even be written off as another lame MMO clone, or the thing will be  packed full of bugs and have miserable game play.

There's just no way of telling at this stage in the game. And so far any of the games that you might list, -EVE being the chief amongst them- that are funded by micro transactions, I don't really regard as a success. I regard it as a game that has been treading water.

The standard of Success for an MMO is not what it once was. It used to be ~250K subs was a huge success. Now it's 1 mil or go home.

Modifié par cedgedc, 17 avril 2011 - 05:26 .

[Had-to-say]

I would buy my first MMO game if Mass Effect becomes a MMO. I support this fully. I love the Mass Effect universe.

[slimgrin]

Hudson:  "We've been trying to think of a way that makes sense for people to experience Mass Effect[/i] with their friends," 

How about not. The way I share ME with my freinds is discussing our respective playthroughs. You guys already have an MMO going. 

[steej]

I don't like paying for wow.

It makes me feel like i have to play it as often and as long as i possibly can to get my moneys worth out of it. It's gets quite obsessive when you feel you don't want to waste any more time in bed then you have to because you could be building xp.

I've read all the concerns about microtransactions. I have a genuine question for you all now. How many of the DLCs did you all buy?
Personally bought them all bar the Equalizer Pack and the Xbox avatars(I don't have one lol).
Each one cost me around £6. I''d pay that for an add on now and then, if MEO was free to play. I'd even pay that for a monthly subscription to be honest.
As for the Starwars Vs MassEffect discussion; I loved the original starwars movies. The prequels were rubbish. I hated the 'digitally remastered' originals! When they shoved Jaba back into the first film!
Further more I have never played a starwars game I liked. Ever.


I think we all have to agree that if an MMO is made of ME it could be absolutely amazing and the best game ever made. But if they do it wrong and go down the standard MMO route, it could kill the MassEffect universe more effectively than the reapers could ever hope for.
 
BioWare: you have a tough call ahead of you. I do not envy your task.

EA: do not rush this game. A long time investment will reap the bigger rewards. 
You could go down in MassEffect history as Paragons! Or you could be classed as Renegades.. 
..the choice is yours.

[cedgedc]

steej wrote...

I don't like paying for wow.

It makes me feel like i have to play it as often and as long as i possibly can to get my moneys worth out of it. It's gets quite obsessive when you feel you don't want to waste any more time in bed then you have to because you could be building xp.

I've read all the concerns about microtransactions. I have a genuine question for you all now. How many of the DLCs did you all buy?
Personally bought them all bar the Equalizer Pack and the Xbox avatars(I don't have one lol).
Each one cost me around £6. I''d pay that for an add on now and then, if MEO was free to play. I'd even pay that for a monthly subscription to be honest.
As for the Starwars Vs MassEffect discussion; I loved the original starwars movies. The prequels were rubbish. I hated the 'digitally remastered' originals! When they shoved Jaba back into the first film!
Further more I have never played a starwars game I liked. Ever.


I think we all have to agree that if an MMO is made of ME it could be absolutely amazing and the best game ever made. But if they do it wrong and go down the standard MMO route, it could kill the MassEffect universe more effectively than the reapers could ever hope for.
 
BioWare: you have a tough call ahead of you. I do not envy your task.

EA: do not rush this game. A long time investment will reap the bigger rewards. 
You could go down in MassEffect history as Paragons! Or you could be classed as Renegades.. 
..the choice is yours.

Basically I am all for Bioware doing what it takes to make a competetive, successful, awesome ME MMO. If they can do that with micro transactions, I won't argue.

Yes, I bought all the DLC.. However, LOTS of people get pissed by DLC. People feel that if they bought the game, they should have access to all the content, and shouldn't have to spend money on each new thing.

If you make it so that the game offers content only to those willing to pay for it, people get frustrated.

With a monthly fee, everyone is paying the same amount for the continued development and new release of content that an MMO continues to offer through it's life span.

Could a developper make a game that derives all it's profits off release sales and subsequent expansion sales without charging a monthly fee or microtransactions? Perhaps. Though I think that innevitably, continued maintenance of servers, support, development etc- it could certainly be difficult without some means of regular cashflow coming in.

Modifié par cedgedc, 18 avril 2011 - 12:53 .

[Eledhan]

steej wrote...

I don't like paying for wow.

It makes me feel like i have to play it as often and as long as i possibly can to get my moneys worth out of it. It's gets quite obsessive when you feel you don't want to waste any more time in bed then you have to because you could be building xp.

I agree. I've played WoW for at least 6 months straight (it's the second longest run I've ever had with a single game). After about 6 months of the same thing over and over again, I finally realized that I felt like I HAD to play in order to get my money's worth. I know exactly how that feels!

Needless to say, I quit WoW because of this.

I've read all the concerns about microtransactions. I have a genuine question for you all now. How many of the DLCs did you all buy?
Personally bought them all bar the Equalizer Pack and the Xbox avatars(I don't have one lol).
Each one cost me around £6. I''d pay that for an add on now and then, if MEO was free to play. I'd even pay that for a monthly subscription to be honest.

The concept of a subscription to play a game is no longer viable, in my mind. If anyone here has played the game League of Legends, you know that there is absolutely NO reason to pay Riot Games a single penny and still enjoy the game tremendously. However, I find that I have probably spent more on that game than I did on WoW...it's also my newest long-term gaming interest. You should know that it literally costs nothing to play League, and yet they have millions of players who probably all contribute funds in some way or another.

As for the Starwars Vs MassEffect discussion; I loved the original starwars movies. The prequels were rubbish. I hated the 'digitally remastered' originals! When they shoved Jaba back into the first film!
Further more I have never played a starwars game I liked. Ever.

Did you not play KOTOR? Cuz, DANG....I don't see how you didn't enjoy that...I mean...it has a HOMICIDAL ROBOT!!

I think we all have to agree that if an MMO is made of ME it could be absolutely amazing and the best game ever made. But if they do it wrong and go down the standard MMO route, it could kill the MassEffect universe more effectively than the reapers could ever hope for.

That just made me LOL! Good point, though.
 

BioWare: you have a tough call ahead of you. I do not envy your task.

EA: do not rush this game. A long time investment will reap the bigger rewards. 
You could go down in MassEffect history as Paragons! Or you could be classed as Renegades.. 
..the choice is yours.

Well, aren't you the witty one! I agree, though.

It'll be a tough thing, but if they wanted to, Bioware could probably dominate the MMO market for 10 years or so if they pull off TOR & then follow that with MEO.

Unfortunately, after watching TOR vids of the game in action, I'm doubtful that it'll bring enough new things to the table to sway people away from the now two most polished and effective MMO's on the market...WoW & Rift.

Modifié par Eledhan, 18 avril 2011 - 01:06 .

[Eledhan]

cedgedc wrote...

Basically I am all for Bioware doing what it takes to make a competetive, successful, awesome ME MMO. If they can do that with micro transactions, I won't argue.

Microtransactions that do not affect the balance of the game are fine...a developer that looks at micros in this way wins my approval. Unfortunately, the free-to-play tradition prior to the last 2 years or so was make a decent game that hooks people, then require them to pay to become more powerful.

This is a skewed picture of the current state of PROPERLY handled F2P models. Take a look at League of Legends, Everquest, LotRO, D&DO, etc. These games provide players the option to enhance their gaming experience by either providing additional classes, raising the level cap, opening new maps and other things, but none of this actually changes the BALANCE of these games. Every option to purchase something is simply for the players to enjoy the game in new and creative ways...and guess what? Players won't pay for stuff they don't want.

This essentially puts control back into the hands of gamers instead of us having to rely on developers to make the correct decisions about what we would like.

Yes, I bought all the DLC.. However, LOTS of people get pissed by DLC. People feel that if they bought the game, they should have access to all the content, and shouldn't have to spend money on each new thing.

Day one DLC is retarded, I agree. However, after the first few months, players should have enough sense to realize that DLC is something that couldn't necessarily be fit into the original game. I agree there are some issues with some developers who might do some crazy stuff, but it's not like they are withholding stuff from players, we still get a fully functional and exciting game...there's nothing to be fussy about, IMO.

If you make it so that the game offers content only to those willing to pay for it, people get frustrated.

See....this is where you're over-generalizing the F2P concept. Recent and successful F2P models do not do this to players. They provide this entire game for free (either it was recently opened up to F2P players, or the core was bought in a one-time purchase), and if you enjoy it, you pay what, $25 to get extra options if the first are not enough for you? Things like costumes/cosmetical options, extra characters/classes/champions, vanity items like pets, extra areas of the world to explore, the list can go on forever without listing a single thing that makes the player more powerful than someone who didn't pay anything extra.

With a monthly fee, everyone is paying the same amount for the continued development and new release of content that an MMO continues to offer through it's life span.

And that's the rub...

The design of a F2P model is to emulate the free enterprise system. If I'm content with what was called "vanilla WoW", then why on earth would I want to pay more money for them to change my favorite game? Unless, of course, I like what they changed!

This is why F2P has become successful...it follows the principle of the free enterprise system where consumers pay for what they want, and companies adjust to those desires, because that's where the money is.

Could a developper make a game that derives all it's profits off release sales and subsequent expansion sales without charging a monthly fee or microtransactions? Perhaps. Though I think that innevitably, continued maintenance of servers, support, development etc- it could certainly be difficult without some means of regular cashflow coming in.

Regular cashflow is a misleading concept when it comes to video games. If that were true, then how do traditional console & offline PC games survive? It's possible to make games that produce enough profit without ongoing revenues.

Think about this...

Blizzard was making roughly $150 million in MONTHLY subscription revenues back when WoW's subscriber base was 10 million (I don't know if it is still up to 11-12, but I think it's probably declined back down some).

I'm guessing it cost probably 40-50 million per month for salaries, servers, etc to handle WoW's continued maintenance and development. I'm no genius in the field of server maintenance, etc. but let's just assume that Blizzard pays all of its WoW employees 120,000 per year on average. Even with 500 employees JUST for WoW, you're only looking at 5 million per month in salaries expenses.

Then you can simply pay for the servers, etc. That means you have about 35-45 million dollars available, and STILL have another 100 million in gross profit to apply to general operating expenses.

PER MONTH.

That's freakin 1.2 billion dollars a year...for ONE GAME.

Developers have noticed this model leaves TONS of opportunity in the market for a savvy business model to come in and steal a slice of that pie...hence the introduction of F2P.

Players are WILLING TO PAY money in order to enjoy a game...F2P simply puts the power in the players' hands so they get to choose what they want to play instead of having to simply be content with the whims of the developers.

[cedgedc]

Eledhan wrote...

Could a developper make a game that derives all it's profits off release sales and subsequent expansion sales without charging a monthly fee or microtransactions? Perhaps. Though I think that innevitably, continued maintenance of servers, support, development etc- it could certainly be difficult without some means of regular cashflow coming in.

Regular cashflow is a misleading concept when it comes to video games. If that were true, then how do traditional console & offline PC games survive? It's possible to make games that produce enough profit without ongoing revenues.

Think about this...

Blizzard was making roughly $150 million in MONTHLY subscription revenues back when WoW's subscriber base was 10 million (I don't know if it is still up to 11-12, but I think it's probably declined back down some).

I'm guessing it cost probably 40-50 million per month for salaries, servers, etc to handle WoW's continued maintenance and development. I'm no genius in the field of server maintenance, etc. but let's just assume that Blizzard pays all of its WoW employees 120,000 per year on average. Even with 500 employees JUST for WoW, you're only looking at 5 million per month in salaries expenses.

Then you can simply pay for the servers, etc. That means you have about 35-45 million dollars available, and STILL have another 100 million in gross profit to apply to general operating expenses.

PER MONTH.

That's freakin 1.2 billion dollars a year...for ONE GAME.

I'm sure Blizzard wishes this were the case. However, it is not. It's very easy to overestimate how much a company like Blizzard is making off of it's game.

What you neglected are things like property rights. See, almost NONE of the IP for World of Warcraft belongs to Blizzard. Elves, orcs, goblins, trolls, dragons, etc- all of that belongs to a little company called Games Workshop. You would not believe how large a chunk of the pie GW cuts out of Blizzard's profits.

And of course there's who-knows how many other expenses. Afterall, Blizzard needs buildings to keep all of it's employees and servers. If they want to have a successful advertising campaign- well all those TV commercials you see don't come free. Nor do all the banner ads all over the internet.

Then they can start paying for R&D of future expansions, content, etc.

All of this adds up very quickly. I'm not saying that Blizzard is broke and we should all give them more money out of sympathy. However, it is a missconception to believe that they're all corporate fatcats living off the accumulated wealth of poor, foolish gamers.

Furthermore, literally every title you have listed as a 'succesful F2P' game, has passed it's prime. These are titles that went F2P looooong after release, and long after the hype and interest had faded. Now they are F2P as a gimic. A way to keep their dwindling playerbases of die-hard loyalists to keep throwing a few nickles and dimes at the project so that the company can keep their lights on and servers running.

None of them are the powerhouses of the MMO world. None. Perhaps GW2 will be? That has yet to be seen however. Here's what you can expect: Rift and WoW releasing new content at GW2's launch to prevent from hemoraging too many customers. Expect expansions either released shortly before or after the launch of GW2.

This means GW2 needs to really pull out some serious shock and awe with the first impression of their product
and then back it up with some seriously compelling, BUG-FREE game play to retain any decent playerbase.

[Eledhan]

cedgedc wrote...

I'm sure Blizzard wishes this were the case. However, it is not. It's very easy to overestimate how much a company like Blizzard is making off of it's game.

What you neglected are things like property rights. See, almost NONE of the IP for World of Warcraft belongs to Blizzard. Elves, orcs, goblins, trolls, dragons, etc- all of that belongs to a little company called Games Workshop. You would not believe how large a chunk of the pie GW cuts out of Blizzard's profits.

And of course there's who-knows how many other expenses. Afterall, Blizzard needs buildings to keep all of it's employees and servers. If they want to have a successful advertising campaign- well all those TV commercials you see don't come free. Nor do all the banner ads all over the internet.

Then they can start paying for R&D of future expansions, content, etc.

I did not neglect those.

Those are AFTER their 100 million PER MONTH in gross
profit. Gross profit, in my example, would be their profit AFTER
handling the salaries of ALL WoW employees...the R&D team, the
maintenance team, the server maintenance fees, etc. I allowed for 500
full-time employees making an average of 120,000 per year.

The only thing you mentioned that would not fit into my gross profit of 100 million per month would be the advertising, real estate costs, and property rights costs.

From an accounting and finance standpoint (which is my profession), the
gross profit is the part you have to focus on. Yes, you have to be
concerned about the general and admin costs, but much of that is absorbed by activision-blizzard's other games as well.

As far as advertising is concerned, it's such a small chunk per month of the 100 million, it's just not worth discussing in the grand scheme of things.

Real estate costs per month are in a similar situation. Let's assume they have 10 buildings all worth 30 million each (HUGE buildings, btw). That's 300 million dollars in real estate. Those are most likely depreciated over 30 years or so...meaning that the building depreciation expense is only 10 million per year, which is less than 1 million per month.

And as far as the Games Workshops is concerned, I don't think they have exclusive rights on orcs, elves, etc. If they do, I'd be VERY shocked...because that would make for some intriguing situations.

I'm sure there ARE some IP issues, but I doubt it's enough to mess with anything.

I'd be willing to concede that the general and admin is roughly equal to the direct costs, even though I feel that is probably not true. Service industries (which is what the traditional MMO industry is) have their biggest costs in direct supplies (servers) and direct labor (maintenance & R&D).

If we assume that, then out of the 150 million in monthly revenues, 100 of it is spent on expenses...the rest is profit...leaving 50 million in profits every month to apply towars the initial development costs...

But WAIT!!!

Those initial costs are often covered by the purchase of the original game and all the expansion packs...Why do I have to pay to purchase, and then pay to play? I don't understand this concept.

All of this adds up very quickly. I'm not saying that Blizzard is broke and we should all give them more money out of sympathy. However, it is a missconception to believe that they're all corporate fatcats living off the accumulated wealth of poor, foolish gamers.

Well, I don't blame Blizzard. I think they're brilliant! Making roughly 50 million  in PROFITS after paying your average employee 120,000 per year? YES PLEASE!!!

Do I want to play their game, though? No...

Do I think it's unfair that they make that much? No...

However, I DO think that other companies have taken notice, and have realized that if they do something slightly different, but maintain quality, they can snag quite a bit of those customers, which is where the change has taken place.

I'm one of those gamers who found a cheaper alternative to WoW and took it. Others have done the same.

The difference is that I was allowed to experience the core game, and then buy into the rest if I WANT to...I'm not FORCED to do so...and that's what is missing from the gaming world right now...there's no way to try something and then put your money behind what you like.

Furthermore, literally every title you have listed as a 'succesful F2P' game, has passed it's prime. These are titles that went F2P looooong after release, and long after the hype and interest had faded. Now they are F2P as a gimic. A way to keep their dwindling playerbases of die-hard loyalists to keep throwing a few nickles and dimes at the project so that the company can keep their lights on and servers running.

League of Legends? They're growing like mad...

I have no idea how much money they make, but good grief...the last patch they released...there was such a tremendous load on the servers that they almost had to keep them offline for an entire day. That game is fully enjoyable for exactly $0...but they have made it so easy to enjoy that players don't mind dropping tons of money in order to spend more quality time with a game they fell in love with...but they don't HAVE to...

None of them are the powerhouses of the MMO world. None. Perhaps GW2 will be? That has yet to be seen however. Here's what you can expect: Rift and WoW releasing new content at GW2's launch to prevent from hemoraging too many customers. Expect expansions either released shortly before or after the launch of GW2.

This means GW2 needs to really pull out some serious shock and awe with the first impression of their product
and then back it up with some seriously compelling, BUG-FREE game play to retain any decent playerbase.

Have you seen any of the videos and critical responses to the trade shows?

I have yet to hear a single complaint about the game...oh, wait...

Yeah I have...they wanted to keep playing, but couldn't!!!

ArenaNet has already promised that micro transactions for power are unacceptable. They've also indicated that everything you could ever want in the game will be included, no extra purchase necessary.

They WILL be releasing "DLC", but it's no different than mini expansions.

The bottom line is this...

WHO SAYS MMO'S HAVE TO BE P2P? What's wrong witht the F2P model, if handled properly?

[Eledhan]

Oh, and just so you know...

I'm just discussing these concepts. I'm more than willing to admit any mistake or misrepresentation I may make.

This is simply a friendly discussion on the viability of a possible MEO game, which I, for one, would LOVE.

And if it were good enough, I might even pay a monthly fee to play it...

However, monthly fees simply don't explain the need to release a full-fledged expansion as well...which is where I think GW2 is going to break the mold.

They are taking a gamble, I'll admit, by running the risk that they won't be able to sway enough players to purchase the game and its subsequent expansions (which will have to cover the cost of the original and each expansion's development costs). This is exactly what the industry needs, however.

Nobody has been willing to take this risk before now with a truly polished and shiny MMO.

The thing about GW2 is that they simply don't need a full-fledged development team running everything at all times due to the dynamic events system. Simply design a new expansion with more stuff, and viola! More money...

I'm much more apt to spend my money on something that I KNOW is new, than to simply keep sinking money into a game month after month.

I mean...

You have to ask yourself...

Is enough new material added to games like WoW to justify each player having to pay $180 in subscriptions each year?

I mean...you could get 3 games the quality of ME2 for that...I just can't see that WoW adds $180 worth of new content each year...barring expansions (since you have to pay extra for those).

[cedgedc]

Eledhan wrote... The only thing you mentioned that would not fit into my gross profit of
100 million per month would be the advertising, real estate costs, and
property rights costs.

What world do you live in that advertising costs are negligible? WoW runs ads sparingly now because their market share has reached a peak.

Look at a game like Rift that has banner ads all over the web and commercials running. They flood social media outlets. That is a multi-million dollar advertising campaign. That is exactly the kindof investment it takes to promote a new game.

Bioware  would have to promote on prime time TV to advertise for a new console MMO. Afterall a lot of console titles have a more TV-centered advertising budget than purely PC online games. That don't come cheap.

And yes, if you look into it, half of what Games Workshop spends their time doing is protecting their IP and collecting dues. Believe me, it's not the flailing Warhammer titles that are raking in the cash for them.

Eledhan wrote... Those initial costs are often covered by the purchase of the original
game and all the expansion packs...Why do I have to pay to purchase, and
then pay to play? I don't understand this concept.

My understanding of MMO's is that the aim is to generate enough revenue in box-sales to cover the cost of developing an expansion. I can't speak first hand for how they spend their money, but i know that this is where a lot of the revenues are directed.

So the monthly fee is payed toward their other, ongoing expenses that we have discussed. Atleast that's the concept. Perhaps what may be worth looking at is the amount people pay monthly. Perhaps the standard $15 is too much. I would be happy paying a fee if it was $5 monthly, instead of paying for DLC.

Eledhan wrote... League of Legends? They're growing like mad...

A) It's not an MMO. That is an online RTS game inspired by DoTA. Totally different category of game with completely different expenditures. Hosting a server for 5-10 players tops, is not the same game as hosting servers for 1-2k players in a persistent world.

I had to look that game up. I'd never heard of it before, and if I did it was in passing and I didn't care enough to look at it. That is not a Triple A, MMO title.

The fact of the matter is, it's easy for an MMO that is past it's prime to switch to a F2P platform to hold onto players that have already switched to other MMO's, and maybe attract the few MMO fans who refuse to pay a sub. It's the equivalent of putting a game on life-support to milk it for all it's worth before pulling the plug.

I fully expect to see WoW go F2P in the next 5-10 years (perhaps even shortly after Titan comes out). And you can bet they'll continue releasing little pets and mounts you can buy for 5 bucks. Blizzard does that better than anyone.

But, trying to launch a game on that platform is not going to generate the kind of revenue that any kind of subscription can. I have my doubts as to whether a high quality, triple A f2p MMO, with equal quality expansions, can be maintained, and offer the kind of support that a P2P triple A MMO can.

If they could, it would have been done. It's no secret that people don't like paying fees. IT wouldn't take a team of genious accountants, and statisticians to get to the bottom of that. Maybe GW2 will change the playing field. Again, I have my doubts.

[Eledhan]

cedgedc wrote...

A lot of stuff that I agree with

Seriously, I don't want to continue that discussion...it's a waste of both of our time. You've made excellent points and I don't think either of us have the necessary facts in order to truly debate the topic any further.

I have my doubts as to whether a high quality, triple A f2p MMO, with equal quality expansions, can be maintained, and offer the kind of support that a P2P triple A MMO can.

If they could, it would have been done. It's no secret that people don't like paying fees. IT wouldn't take a team of genious accountants, and statisticians to get to the bottom of that. Maybe GW2 will change the playing field. Again, I have my doubts.

Basically, this is what I gather from the quoted portion of your post...

A high quality F2P MMO can't be maintained because it would have been done by now.

If that's not what you mean, let me know, but I'm going to address this.

First of all, just because something is possible and the market would bear it does NOT mean that companies will do it.

I'd like to call your attention to a little something called alternative fuel vehicles...they've been around since the 70's at least. Why haven't they ever been mass-produced? Because the fuel companies bought the rights to them so they wouldn't be put out of business.

The concepts at this point in the discussion are now tilted toward business strategy more than anything else. If you can convince the populace that the only way to have alternative fuels is to have cars that can run off of them, then all you have to do is convince the populace that there are no such vehicles. That way, the populace won't get upset that they are paying so much in gasoline to drive their vehicles.

This is a common tactic in business, and it's completely legitimate. The problem with this is, the consumer misses out on tremendous value, and is unaware of it. Most MMO players are more than happy to pay $15 a month in order to have a persistent gaming world because that's all they know...similar to how we have always been content to pay whatever price is listed on the gas pump because that's all we know. If all of a sudden hybrid cars, and other alternatives were reliable and cost efficient for the consumer to purchase, then they would DEMAND nothing less, and those fuel companies would be left out to dry.

The same is going to happen to all the P2P model MMO's if GW2 is a success...

If players discover that it's no longer requried to pay $15 a month to have the same exact (if not better) experience, they simply WON'T.

I will admit, there's nothing guaranteeing GW2 will succeed. However, I really think these guys know what they're doing. And if they do it good enough to make money off of it, you will never see another successful P2P game released again. We will have to see if that's possible, though...GW2 is sailing in uncharted waters, even though they have already had internal success with GW1.

If I were an RPG or action gamer, I'd be keeping my eye on GW2. They are either going to make history, or it will fizzle out after a few months. But there is literally something for everyone...

Personal story with no other real players necessary, but definately optional? Check
Immersive, perpetually evolving world with social interaction? Check
Competitive multiplayer matching system? Check
Role playing elements? Check
Innovative Questing system that involves the player's mind and not just their fingers? Check
Free to play once purchased? CHECK

The only thing that will cause this game to fail is if the dynamic event system and the dungeons don't provide enough end-game content after running through the story. However, I seriously doubt it will matter, since you can do the story multiple times and get different results, similar to ME. Not to mention the competitive side and increased difficulty dungeons.

I'm excited to see how it turns out, but like you...I'm curious as to how they will survive. I'm thinking it's because they have set their budget, and have determined that they can make the game large enough without exceeding the budget, and then support it until the next expansion. If so, then I'm betting they'll take over the MMO market.

Only time will tell.