[Megathread] Wildstar - Now F2P

[Deleted]

...

It's the same source that said it was 100 million, 200 million, and 500 million. How can it be a reliable source if it keeps changing what it think it cost?

Because the Times had to have the same source? I dont see them revealing it anywhere, do you?

[RoninaThorstone]

Because the Times had to have the same source? I dont see them revealing it anywhere, do you?

Dear god.

Go and read the swtor subforums archive on this. You have no idea what you are talking about.

[mkultra55]

lets assume either of the above is accurate. That is what SWTOR claimed.. yet they went free to play anyway. Clearly that is not enough for those funding the development of these games to be considered profitably enough. Sure they could of eked out a profit but when B2P and F2P options bring in more.. and clearly they do for these companies because they sure didnt switch to them for charity its clear what models are winning out in todays market.

My assumption is that TOR and Rift had projections we aren't privy to and saw a steady decline in subs so they both went the F2P route to stop the bleeding. I'd guess that 500K was an accurate number for profitability and their own internal analysis showed them falling below that line at some point in the future.

Prior to WOW 500K in subs meant a wildly successful MMO. WOW skewed the ROI expectations for the money people who invested in all the "failed" MMO's after WOW. Those bean counters are the ones who forced so many early releases like WAR and AoC which doomed those games.

I get the feeling that we're at the beginning of a new business paradigm for MMO's. Companies look to EVE as an example of creating a game that doesn't try to cater to everyone yet is financially very successful.

I'm happy they went to the sub model.

[Deleted]

Dear god.

Go and read the swtor subforums archive on this. You have no idea what you are talking about.

How about you link it then, why would i read a subforum i have no interest at all for?

And if you cant see that losing half your sub base in 6 months, is pretty scary towards the next half year, im just done talking with you. Trying too hard to defend something that just isnt reality.

[SirRobin]

Wow! This thread is really burning through the pages now.

All I can really say is that while going P2P might be a nice vote of confidence in their game from Carbine? It doesn't really give them any wiggle room. Haven't we been through this scenario already? Several times?

Hope they don't screw it up.

[Holtzmann]

I think the best way to answer that is: "was there enough for any MMO to sustain this sort of business model launched in the past 9.5 years?"
No. There was not.

I argue that those games failed on their own designed choices and their subscription numbers dropped because of that. SWTOR is often held up as the ur-example of the failure of the subscription-based model, but that ignores the fact that it was a deeply flawed game upon release. Two common complaints at the time were that it was badly optimized and it didn't have enough end-game content, which are both serious downsides to any MMO and specially one that was as heavily hyped as The Old Republic. Other subscription-based games had their developers change the payment model for other reasons (F2P is commonly touted as being the more profitable model).

So far I haven't seen any glaring issues with Wildstar (keeping in mind I'm a World of Warcraft player) that I believe would cause it to be so unattractive as to not be viable. I could change my opinion later on, of course, which is why I'm following its development.

Actually, now I really want to find out how many subscribers the games with "optional" subscriptions have nowadays. I wonder where I could look that up.

[Vexies]

I'm happy they went to the sub model.

Look.. if they where making a conservative but fun and well crafted game I would agree with you. But there not, they are swinging for the fences here. To its credit its full featured and they are clearly going for broke. Unfortunately not everything is working as intended. The release date was pushed back and development costs have clearly risen. They are banking on going big or going home. The recent interview supports that they "believe" they have what it takes. We will see. However, dont kid yourself into thinking they are making a small well crafting indy game that can survive on a shoe string budget cause thats not what I see.

Actually, now I really want to find out how many subscribers the games with "optional" subscriptions have nowadays. I wonder where I could look that up.

I guess look at wow then.. cause there arent ANY to my knowledge that have released in the last 5 years that are still using a sub model

[RoninaThorstone]

I argue that those games failed on their own designed choices and their subscription numbers dropped because of that. SWTOR is often held up as the ur-example of the failure of the subscription-based model, but that ignores the fact that it was a deeply flawed game upon release. Two common complaints at the time were that it was badly optimized and it didn't have enough end-game content, which are both serious downsides to any MMO and specially one that was as heavily hyped as The Old Republic. Other subscription-based games had their developers change the payment model for other reasons (F2P is commonly touted as being the more profitable model).

So far I haven't seen any glaring issues with Wildstar (keeping in mind I'm a World of Warcraft player) that I believe would cause it to be so unattractive as to not be viable. I could change my opinion later on, of course, which is why I'm following its development.

Actually, now I really want to find out how many subscribers the games with "optional" subscriptions have nowadays. I wonder where I could look that up.

Then wildstar is in trouble because better games have "failed".

- - - Updated - - -

I guess look at wow then.. cause there arent ANY to my knowledge that have released in the last 5 years that are still using a sub model

WoW is mandatory.

Optional subs are Lotro, aoc, rift, tera, swtor, ect.

[Kelimbror]

Off topic: Kitty, that was some of the purplest prose I've seen on these forums.

I don't take anything as an insult unless it is direct or putting words in my mouth. Otherwise for all my bravado I just like discussing/arguing with people. At the end of the day I have no problems saying I'm sorry nor accepting the same. We're all the bigger men and the lowest of the low here. It's the nature of a forum. It's just one of many masks we wear.

In which case the player in question wouldn't have been interested in the game to begin with, because it was not designed for them.

I think that's what they wanted beta for. Some of these things can't be fully understood until played. Not everyone reads every W*W and follows their twitter religiously.

I think the crux of the matter here is: are there enough potential players out there to sustain a game like Wildstar with this sort of business model?

The short answer is no. Everyone using the unknown future as concrete proof that it can (not you) is simply wrong. The only logical approach is to use history to predict what will happen. History and current data suggests that while there are more MMO players than ever, they are more fragmented than ever. Additionally, no mainstream subscription game outside of WoW (EVE is not mainstream) has survived as that model. While there's always a chance anything can happen, the logical assumption is that it will not in this case either.

But I think both of us agree it won't be an insanely popular game like World of Warcraft was.

Actually I did think it was set to garner massive numbers of players as I had some relative knowledge of their hybrid system as they mentioned it behind closed doors. Unfortunately it was a misinterpretation as Carbine has twisted B2P with a sub option to somehow just mean a standard subscription. Now that I see through the lie, I think they are set for the same course as every other MMO. Year 1 Cash Grab, B2P/F2P conversion, rake in the cash store profits.

Wouldn't that being "verbose", though? I thought "pithy" meant "short and to the point". Ah, well. I like making long-ish posts either way. :P

Forcefully expressive actually. I tend to disregard anything that construes literary limitations. It has some connotations to that effect, as in the use of concise. It generally means short and blunt. Unfortunately that is often a vulgar form of expression on these forums as it would equate to saying caveman quality insults.

I prefer to give us more grandiose liberties than that.

[Deleted]

Then wildstar is in trouble because better games have "failed".

better games? lol

[Vexies]

WoW is mandatory.

Optional subs are Lotro, aoc, rift, tera, swtor, ect.

Ah, yes my bad. I totally read that wrong before

[mkultra55]

Look.. if they where making a conservative but fun and well crafted game I would agree with you. But there not, they are swinging for the fences here. To its credit its full featured and they are clearly going for broke. Unfortunately not everything is working as intended. The release date was pushed back and development costs have clearly risen. They are banking on going big or going home. The recent interview supports that they "believe" they have what it takes. We will see. However, dont kid yourself into thinking they are making a small well crafting indy game that can survive on a shoe string budget cause thats not what I see.



I guess look at wow then.. cause there arent ANY to my knowledge that have released in the last 5 years that are still using a sub model

I never said they were making an indy game. WOW created profitability expectations that became impossible to meet. That doesn't mean a game with a small but strong sub base like EVE isn't profitable. I trust the business people running the money side of things for Wildstar to have better metrics than random posters here. They know what Box sales they need and how many subs they have to keep after the initial rush in order to be profitable.

I don't get the hate for the sub model. F2P is never free.

[Kelimbror]

I don't get the hate for the sub model. F2P is never free.

It is outdated and doesn't work..what more is there to get about that? Also it's a myth that people are denouncing subs in favor of simply having a F2P game. Most people would have preferred Wildstar be B2P just like GW2. Likewise it's a myth to think there aren't F2P games you can play legit for free.

[Deleted]

It is outdated and doesn't work..what more is there to get about that? Also it's a myth that people are denouncing subs in favor of simply having a F2P game. Most people would have preferred Wildstar be B2P just like GW2. Likewise it's a myth to think there aren't F2P games you can play legit for free.

I guess subjective works for you, no need for facts. Most people would have prefered B2P, where did that number come from? A F2P game with the "full" experience is never free.

[Kelimbror]

I guess subjective works for you, no need for facts. Most people would have prefered B2P, where did that number come from?

What number are you referring to? I don't recall stating a number. You can read through this thread to see that the people here (which I maybe didn't specify clearly) aren't demanding for games to be free. That is a popular misconception that people wanting something other than a subcription model are lazy, poor, freeloaders.

A F2P game with the "full" experience is never free.

Another poster doesn't need you to move the goal posts for him. But what constitues 'full' has nothing to do with it. You don't get the 'full' WoW by paying a subcription and haven't for some time. You don't even get the 'full' console games by buying them, as they are then bombarded by DLC.

This isn't anything new or relegated to F2P games, so it doesn't support your stance and is overwhelmingly irrelevant.

[Holtzmann]

I think that's what they wanted beta for. Some of these things can't be fully understood until played. Not everyone reads every W*W and follows their twitter religiously.

Anything that lets them refine their design goals is good, although Carbine might have been too generous with what they wanted to put in the game from the get-go and that's going to come back and bite them in the ass. Even long-runners like World of Warcraft and EVE Online have features that have long been promised but never fully delivered (lookin' at you, Dance Studio!).

The short answer is no. Everyone using the unknown future as concrete proof that it can (not you) is simply wrong. The only logical approach is to use history to predict what will happen. History and current data suggests that while there are more MMO players than ever, they are more fragmented than ever. Additionally, no mainstream subscription game outside of WoW (EVE is not mainstream) has survived as that model. While there's always a chance anything can happen, the logical assumption is that it will not in this case either.

Fair enough. But historically no one had done a non-stop aerial crossing of the Atlantic Ocean before 1919, until Alcock and Brown did exactly that. That's what I'm excited over: Carbine is taking risks. This culture of designing "safe" games gave us the current spunkgargleweewee genre (to borrow a line from Yahtzee), which I personally see as a blight upon the gaming world. Is there a big chance that it's going to miss its desired targets? Certainly. But that's what makes it interesting to me, and that's why I'm going to keep this game firmly in my sights as it develops: there is much more at stake now.

It helps that I have no personal beefs regarding P2P games turning B2P or F2P. If the game is good I'll just enjoy being able to play for free, I don't see it as a failure. I remember boggling at the folks screaming bloody murder at Team Fortress 2's switch to a "Free to Play" model. They said they felt robbed of the money they paid for the game, and I just can't understand that point of view. The money I had previously paid for a game, be it purchase or subscription, is gone already, no point being upset about it.

Actually I did think it was set to garner massive numbers of players as I had some relative knowledge of their hybrid system as they mentioned it behind closed doors. Unfortunately it was a misinterpretation as Carbine has twisted B2P with a sub option to somehow just mean a standard subscription. Now that I see through the lie, I think they are set for the same course as every other MMO. Year 1 Cash Grab, B2P/F2P conversion, rake in the cash store profits.

I'm curious: do you have any source on them saying it was going to be B2P? Or did the community assume that by itself from a lack of official sources? Because I remember one of the developers being very specific in saying it was going to be subscription-based quite a few months ago.

Forcefully expressive actually. I tend to disregard anything that construes literary limitations. It has some connotations to that effect, as in the use of concise. It generally means short and blunt. Unfortunately that is often a vulgar form of expression on these forums as it would equate to saying caveman quality insults.

I prefer to give us more grandiose liberties than that.

We may disagree on some things (and agree on others), but one thing is certain: you're fun to debate. :P


EDIT:

Then wildstar is in trouble because better games have "failed".

That's painfully subjective. I didn't like SWTOR at all, for example. But I get your point. We shall see how it goes as the game develops.

[Iseeyou]

I finally managed to get a key.

Guys it "feels" so good. It's so smooth like when you move in WoW. You know what i mean ?

First time i feel this in another MMO.

[Deleted]

What number are you referring to? I don't recall stating a number. You can read through this thread to see that the people here (which I maybe didn't specify clearly) aren't demanding for games to be free. That is a popular misconception that people wanting something other than a subcription model are lazy, poor, freeloaders.

Another poster doesn't need you to move the goal posts for him. But what constitues 'full' has nothing to do with it. You don't get the 'full' WoW by paying a subcription and haven't for some time. You don't even get the 'full' console games by buying them, as they are then bombarded by DLC.

This isn't anything new or relegated to F2P games, so it doesn't support your stance and is overwhelmingly irrelevant.

http://strawpoll.me/346371/r

here you go a poll with over 1500 people over 50% have no problem with the sub model and only 20% have dropped the game. But i guess using a handful of people posting in this thread is a good enough number for "most people" want b2p...

How do you feel about the new WS info?

1.Love it, still aboard.
808 votes (52%)

2.
Sorry, this is a dealbreaker.
307 votes (20%)

3.
Still aboard, a bit disappointed.
257 votes (16%)

4.
I'm still on the fence.
195 votes (12%)

for people not wanting to click.

[RoninaThorstone]

I finally managed to get a key.

Guys it "feels" so good. It's so smooth like when you move in WoW. You know what i mean ?

First time i feel this in another MMO.

Um... depending on what you mean by "finally got a key" then you haven't logged in yet. By finally do you mean last week? The servers aren't up until like thursday morning.

[Fencers]

We don't know who is voting in that poll or what outlets are voting for it. It could be heavily biased one way or the other.

Doesn't seem like any less anecdotal than other opinions and speculation itt.