84 réponses à ce sujet

[Seagloom]

And yet I still refuse to chain myself to that strict definition. Call it stubbornness or arrogance. Thems the breaks.

[Zaxares]

Honestly, at this point I doubt that anything will be able to dethrone WoW as King of the MMOs, except WoW2. Its fanbase has invested far too much time, energy and money into the game to even think of going anywhere else. Trying to compete directly with WoW is a losing venture, so the safest bet for emerging MMOs/MMO-hybrids is to go with a F2P model with micro-transactions, or with an 'expansion model supported by micro-transactions' similar to what Guild Wars has done. That way, if the project fails, you can just pull the plug without causing too much grief to subscribers.

I wasn't going to buy the new Neverwinter in any case, and the transformation into an MMO just makes it even more unlikely for me to do so. I play RPGs to immerse myself in the world's lore and setting, and it's exceedingly hard to do that in MMOs when there's people like "XxLord_VaderxX" and "Leggolass_99" or "N00bkill@" running around. Not to mention the inevitable spammers, goldsellers and beggars that exist in every single MMO. XD

[dunniteowl]

Wow, this thread is certainly morphing into interesting territory. I was going to make another left turn and go in yet a stranger direction, but I think I'd just like to say that the whole F2P, Subscription Models, Fee Based, Micro-Transactions concepts are things we will definitely see growing -- not only for games.

Perhaps someday, in the not too distant future, you'll get on a road and it'll charge you for using it a varying fee, depending on how far you drive on it. It may also be a reality in the near term to see a communications plan that charges you only the amount of time you use by buying a rechargeable card and when the time is used up, then you either don't call or just refill the card for the phone. And while I'm idea spinning here, maybe soon we can watch movies on TV and only pay for the ones we watch.

Oh crap, my wife just told me all that stuff's old news already. nevermind.

[Shallina]

You don't invest money in WoW, sorry it's not a F2P with a cash shop that makes you buy items in order to progress

If poeple stay with WoW it's beceause the MMO that came after WOW and are correct, personnally I only see 2. And they have player that went from WoW and stayed with them.

The real problem with MMO P2P, is the list the correct one, and when you do it, you'll see that they are less than 5. Now yu take each of them, and you'll see that they all have their little success.

Take for exemple Bioware MMO, WAR (launched by the now dead Mythic), it came out 3 or 4 year after WoW, and it was a software that was for it's technical side more than 4 years older than WoW, when WoW was launched, and of course it was full of bug that was stopping players from playing it. WoW doesn't have a single game stopping bug.

How do you expect a game like that to be successfull ?

SWTOR seems to be a solid game at the moment, if it's true for the whole the game, even if it's a P2P you'll see that it will be successfull. And that the P2P model is actually the best one for large online game.

After you have 2 way for P2P at the moment.

The classic way, you buy time to play the game.

The other way (only Guild wars) you buy extension. When you compare guild wars to the other, you see that when they stopped to produce extensions, they stopped all evolution and major update for the game, while the classic P2P are still all updated and have major additional content every 6 to 8 months.

Also as someone who played a lot guild wars and classics mMO there are many things where guild wars really fall short next to the "good" subscription based MMO. Doesn't make GW a bad game, it's actually  a good one, but still there are a lot of short coming in GW that good subscription based MMO doesn't have. Those shortcomming are so big that the GW dev don't call GW a MMO in the first place but a CRPG.

So avoid to compare GW to "eal MMO3 beceause GW isn't one actually . Compare what can be compared.

Modifié par Shallina, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:14 .

[likeorasgod]

Shallina wrote...

Guild wars isn't a F2P.
F2P are for games not good enought to be P2P, and are mostly a scam.

Actualy it is, and it was the sale base that got me into it in the first place.  They didn't charge a monthly fee to play, while P2P do charge a monthly fee.  Now as for the if the game was free to download or not is a diffrent group of games.  Those are the ones that some one mention are normaly your crappy free to play games.  I never been a fan of P2P play even though I played Pirates of the Burning Sea since Beta (still got one paid account out of my 5) and I paid for a year of Aion cause I enjoyed it, but that just ran out and I haven't re-upped it since.  I got the feeling it's going to be alot like GW, or atleast I hope it will be.  WIth GW2 comeing out soon,  and it's time slot for a while would put it in a good spot to take over the market as the new game if they do it right when the come out with Neverwinter....since alot of other games would have been out for a while and the market would be about due for a new MMO to come out to let all the gameing geeks flock to something new for a while.  Though I will be happy just keep playing my NW2 games and the content of other players made for me to enjoy.

[Shallina]

GW charge extension and additional content, and the initial game. This sir make it it a P2P.

The software update and additional content in GW is linked to extension that you purcharge. Since they stoped it, no additional content o major update were made.

With the subscription model you have major update that are "given", in fact they are not given since the money behind them are the subscriptions fee.


Now take a deeper look to guild wars buiseness model. The original buiseness was to sell an extension every 6 month, wich they did 3 time, when you bought the 3d extensions, the monthly cost of guild wars was at around 8,5 $ a month. (take all the extension cost, divide by the number of month since release and so on).

Someone who start the game has to pay the original game + all the extensions with that buiseness model.

For a monthy fee, you purchage the original game, and you pay one month to be able to play one month.

Also keep in mind that Guild wars wasn't an MMO but a CRPG, they had a lot less constraint since you were playing with only 16 players together, unlike a real MMO where you can have more than 400 hundreds players on the same field.

And also keept in mind the evolution and additional content of Guildwars was really small next to what "good" subscriptions MMO made.

Cheaper but less. In other word, don't dream, it's not tomorow that you'll be able to play for free something similar to WoW, AION, or RIFT, it's true that subscription based MMO cost more to play than something like guildwars, but they also give their players a lot more (for the good one).

Modifié par Shallina, 09 octobre 2011 - 10:41 .

[The Fred]

Shallina wrote...
GW charge extension and additional content, and the initial game. This sir make it it a P2P.

OK as I said, it's splitting hairs and semantics. If you want to get really technical, then yes, all commercial games are "pay-to-play" because you have to buy them. However, in the context of MMOs, the distinction is more between subscription vs non-subscription games, because this is a more useful distinction generally than no cost vs initial cost, when you still have subcsriptions to take into account.

Incidentally, Guild Wars only has one expansion. The other three are all stand-alone campaigns; you can buy all or one, and still play the game, though you may be limited to certain things. Once you have a campaign or the expansion, you can then play it for as long as you want without paying anything else. That's very different to a subscription model. The pressure to buy another campaign or expansion is no greater than the same pressure in a game like NWN2 (in fact in NWN2 you can't even have more than one custom class without SoZ!).

Anyway I'd really rather not get too far into definitions and stuff here. That can be debated in some language or terminology forum. It's far more interesting to see how the various models, whatever we may call them, are developing, than to argue over which is which, IMO.

[Shallina]

But the content isn't updated anymore and Guild wars is a stale game since they released the last extention. There is no "new interest" to play it since the last extension beceause the game has becomme stale. While P2P with monthly fee are updated with new content "frequently".

[dunniteowl]

Shallina, the point you seem to be making is that without new content, the games are no longer worth playing or something. What's that necessarily got to do with the design of the payment model? You keep hammering away at this singular point without making a connection as to how the payment models affect this sort of decision making. I'd like to see something a bit more cogent -- you know, being as how this is a discussion and not just an either/or argument like in politics. In other words, instead of repeating your point over and over, how about making something closer to an explanation of how your point fits into the discussion?

I'm curious to see where you might be headed with this.


My earlier message about the pay to play, free to play, etc and then my little rant about the "future" of how these transactions may affect other things was intended to be humorous and at the same time point out that perhaps the whole micro-transaction concept is really not something new to gaming and then spreading out from there, but in fact, is the elephant in the room of current economics models for developing a continuous revenue stream.

And that idea is nothing new. Ever heard the phrase, "Nickle and dimed to death?" I think we're just seeing an old car with new paint.

[The Fred]

Shallina wrote...

But the content isn't updated anymore and Guild wars is a stale game since they released the last extention. There is no "new interest" to play it since the last extension beceause the game has becomme stale. While P2P with monthly fee are updated with new content "frequently".

You're (almost) quite right, and this is the thing which is often seen as the advantage of the P2P model (though I should say, GW does still get new content, occassional balance updates and bugfixes but also new storyline stuff - they are trying I believe to pave the way for the sequel). P2P ought in theory to give you more back. However, non-MMO games have been around for a long time and typically gave little beyond bugfixes and other updates, and yet many are still popular. NWN1 and 2 have had it good with their updates by far, but even something like BG which got a lot less support is still played a lot.

I agree completely that you are supposed to get more back from a P2P game, but I'm not sure that what you do get is worth the extra cost. Guild Wars is an example of something which may have gotten a little stale, but has a lifespan far beyond what its price would suggest if compared with a subscription model. NWN(2) is another, though the toolset admittedly gives theses a massive advantage in terms of lifespan.

[Shallina]

When there is no new content you will becomme bored of the game even if it's a very good game.

[MokahTGS]

Shallina wrote...

But the content isn't updated anymore and Guild wars is a stale game since they released the last extention. There is no "new interest" to play it since the last extension beceause the game has becomme stale. While P2P with monthly fee are updated with new content "frequently".

This is simply not true or just your opinion.  Guildwars is actually updated with new quests and storyline on a very regular basis.  It is called GuildWars Beyond.

Also, Guild Wars has stopped releasing expansions because they are releasing Guild Wars 2 in 2012.  That game will still have the same model of Guild Wars but with the MMO elements that you mentioned were lacking from the first game.

[MartinJHolm]

Shallina wrote...

GW charge extension and additional content, and the initial game. This sir make it it a P2P.

I find most what you say to be utter nonsense and this in particular, GW is buy to play (b2p) you don't pay after you bought it so I don't really see how you would label it p2p.

[Shallina]

You need to pay to play. I know many poeple will say Guild wars " BEST MMO EVA" beceause it's free.

But no... first guild isn't a MMO but a CRPG and can't really be compared to a real MMO. And they don't let you play it for free. The B2P is a good designation but with the frequent extension you had an "hidden monthly fee" wich was, price of the extension * number of extensions / number of month you played.

Don't be fooled by marketing

Modifié par Shallina, 09 octobre 2011 - 11:54 .

[The Fred]

Shallina wrote...
When there is no new content you will becomme bored of the game even if it's a very good game.

Eventually, yes, but look at cost per lifespan. Something like WoW keeps charging you each month just to keep playing. Something like NWN(2) has an amazing lifespan with a single initial fee. Guild Wars is the same; the updates GW players get may not be comparable to what other MMO players get, but these cost nothing.

Shallina wrote...
You need to pay to play. I know many poeple will say Guild wars " BEST MMO EVA" beceause it's free.

But no... first guild isn't a MMO but a CRPG and can't really be compared to a real MMO. And they don't let you play it for free. The B2P is a good designation but with the frequent extension you had an "hidden monthly fee" wich was, price of the extension * number of extensions / number of month you played.

I see what you are getting at, but if you owned Guild Wars you could keep playing just fine without buying a second campaign or the expansion. Yes you would miss out on a lot of things but if you didn't pay, you didn't have your account suspended. "Pay-to-play" games require you to shell out even just to play the same content you've always had.

Anyway how is this different from a game like NWN(2)? Each of the NWN games has two expansions which you could, by your logic, equate to a monthly subscription.

Anyway, I find it interesting to note how many people have moved towards the "buy-to-play", let's say, model. I was under the impression the Guild Wars, for example, was languishing because it relied on constant growth. However it seems a lot of people are actually quite into cosmetic purchases, etc.

[Shallina]

You can't compare the aditionnnal content made for guild wars and the one made for subscription based game that take their game seriously. The amount of additional for a "good subscription" game is ten time highter.

The goal of guild wars is to make you buy the gamebox, to let you enjoy the game but not to have you play the game forever, beceause they have a bandwitch to pay.

So a game like Guild wars is made with in mind an average of hours that each players will play, with a "limited content" so the average number of hours played won't exceed the budget allowed for running the game.

The goal of a subscription based game is to provide an unlimited content so players nevers fall short in things to do, don't grow bored and continue to pay their subscription.


The only games you'll have for free, are game that poeple make for themself and then share. Things like what the NWN/NWN2 community produce.

For exemple, the only reason why the BG reload team is making that module it's beaceause we want to play BG in 3D with a newer engine, and improved combat system. Sharring it is only a big bonus.

Modifié par Shallina, 10 octobre 2011 - 09:46 .

[MartinJHolm]

Shallina wrote...

You need to pay to play. I know many poeple will say Guild wars " BEST MMO EVA" beceause it's free.

But no... first guild isn't a MMO but a CRPG and can't really be compared to a real MMO. And they don't let you play it for free. The B2P is a good designation but with the frequent extension you had an "hidden monthly fee" wich was, price of the extension * number of extensions / number of month you played.

Don't be fooled by marketing

More nonsense.

As I said GW is buy to play, pay to play means you pay a subscription.

And the whole CRPG is a term Arenanet came up with themselves, that doesn't mean it isn't a MMO because it is.

[dunniteowl]

I get what you're saying. I don't buy the explanation, though. Giving the motive behind a model the way you do, it sounds like you're interpreting how these folks are thinking and also attributing the additional input of money over time into development as a "more serious" mentality. None of that do I agree with, simply because it's obviously an opinion without anything to back it up other than someone else agreeing with how you see it.

Why can't Guild Wars be made by people just as "serious" about their development as opposed to say, World of Warcraft? GW has a much better chance at getting some money off me than WoW does.

What I see are different ways to produce an income stream. WoW runs on a subscription fee that is chunked into a monthly fee. In a single year, how much new content is WoW going to "wow" me with? It seems to me, that major new game content downloads (like a new set of areas, etc.) come out about every year and a half to three years. In the meantime, even if I only paid 10 units per month, that's 120 units of cost in a year. Averaged over the life of new updates, each new content area's fees cost way more than anything they could provide me in terms of new content, new features and interest.

By the same token, we mustn't confuse financial reward or success to mean or indicate a level of quality that clearly isn't there -- and conversely, lack of financial success or reward to indicate the lack of serious commitment or quality. This is a mistake of confunding money income as something more than it is. If money = quality, then we'd all have to agree that McDonalds is just about the world's worst burger, based on it's own price. However, were we to look at nothing more than the bottom line of McDonalds and how many burgers it's sold, we'd have to hold it up as the pinnacle of financial success. That doesn't make their burgers taste any better to me. Or to the execs counting their cash. All it means is that they cater to a market of one kind -- and it does well for them.

There is no inherent level of quality, satisfaction or devotion to outcome based on how financially successful the product is for the home team.

I would caution you to heed your own words: Don't be fooled by marketing.

In this manner, comparing Guild Wars' financial model to WoW's is all we can do. We cannot interpret the mindset of developer seriousness based on financial models. We cannot divine the level of quality of product investment by programming staff on how much the customer pays out over time, or whether or not new content is coming from the developer at a set pace.

It's easy to follow that more money coming in should generally mean more ability to develop and add content over time. Howver, if you look at the WoW financial model of a subscription based set of monthly fees, versus buying the game at a store (whether online or brick and mortar) and then getting into the game, then no matter how quickly WoW develops content, they're overcharging versus a stand alone single player experience or a stand alone multiplayer experience.

This doesn't mean that WoW is inherently better designed, higher quality or an improved product with new features over time that keeps people playing. Investment of time and money by the player (in a format that is known to attract addictive behaviors -- video gaming in general) and "growth" of their character's *(and by inference, their own) status within the game's social structure is, in my estimation, the reason for the success of WoW.

It's a very simple to grasp game, made hard to upgrade (in terms of character growth) without investing a lot of time and money in that time, that makes WoW's financial model a roaring success. It's not the quality of the game. Here we see the same argument implied in the McDonalds burger analogy. A more financially successful business model does not a greater burger make, nor a greater game make. Don't be fooled by marketing as quality of experience.

dno

[DarkestHour420]

Zaxares wrote...

Honestly, at this point I doubt that anything will be able to dethrone WoW as King of the MMOs, except WoW2. Its fanbase has invested far too much time, energy and money into the game to even think of going anywhere else. Trying to compete directly with WoW is a losing venture, so the safest bet for emerging MMOs/MMO-hybrids is to go with a F2P model with micro-transactions, or with an 'expansion model supported by micro-transactions' similar to what Guild Wars has done. That way, if the project fails, you can just pull the plug without causing too much grief to subscribers.

I personally think WoW is in the process of dethroning itself.  I played it off and on for years and it just doesn't have the appeal it used to.  Even though it's still doing financially great, losing 1 million subscriptions should speak volumes.

That said, there is a lot of fanboyism when it comes to The Old Republic and Guild Wars 2 and I will probably wind up getting both but I think at this point the market is so completely oversaturated with fantasy MMOs that they just get old quick for me now.  

I'm a perminate beta tester for The Old Republic and although I can't say much because of the non disclosure agreement, I will say thus far it is a fantasic game with the type of story lines you'd expect from a Bioware game, which is a nice refresher when your typical MMOs involving clicking through lines of text because you don't care what the NPC is talking about.

Really storyline, gameplay and content is what developers need to focus on to last I think.  Graphics are great and all but your game will still suck if you don't have the former.  Look at Final Fantasy XIV for an example.

My problems with MMOs are they do get quick stale after a while and it just doesn't have that personal experience you get with NWN especially when you have DM involvement on PWs.  I spent so many years of various hardcore RP servers across both titles, some good some bad but I enjoyed every minute of it.  I really think that personal touch is what always brings me back to them because the RP in MMORPG is not NWN RP.

Modifié par DarkestHour420, 10 octobre 2011 - 12:59 .

[Shallina]

Do you know what is the most fun of all this poeple praising guild wars and trashing WoW ?



The first lead designer of WoW, the one who designed the core of this game is actually one of the guy who founded arena.net and then made Guild wars.

There is also a lot of similiraties in the gameplay of both game.

The biggest difference is that WoW is made to keep the player entertained for as long as possible so they continue to pay their subscription.


And the other is build around an average of hours played until you stop beceause you have done everything that was entertaining you and then switched to something else.

It's a good thing, it gives choice to the players , Beceause WoW and Guild wars are both fantastics games. Of course WoW is more than 10 times the scope of Guild wars, but it's also more expensive since you need to pay a subscription.



As someone who played them both, I really enjoyed both of them, but the
fact that Guild wars is build around "an average of hours played" for
each player is obvious, and that number of hours is  enought so the game
is worth its price.


You cannot maintain a huge online game running for free, or else the game won't run for long. (Server, electrical bill, network bill, and poeple that look after the server) All of this has a cost, and if you don't want to fail and have to shut it down, you need an economic buiseness that isn't  "ALL for free".

Modifié par Shallina, 10 octobre 2011 - 02:06 .

[MartinJHolm]

Actually you can maintain a game only by box sales, Blizzard themselves have said so, also the cost of running servers and bandwidth has dropped a lot in recent years.

[Shallina]

Well it depend on what you run. It's obvious that running WoW cost a lot more than running Guild wars or something like starcraft Diablo or NWN.

And even if the price dropped it's still not free.