TRION - You want to bring back old players?

[Orange Joe]

Do you really want to get me started on what a company should deliver for a sub fee compared to some other companies not delivering who charge the same fee? If you people do what I did quite awhile ago you will realize there is a section of the MMO population that can go rot in hell because I do not want to play a game with those hypocrites.

These are the babies who cried for things, then got them from Trion and still quit. My philosophy on this debate is fuck em all. If they choose to play then good on them if not too bad. Let them drop cash in a free to play sink hole for all I care. It is there money. If Americans refuse to learn from what happened in the Korean market after most everything went free to play, then there is no saving these people.

What does America have anything to do with this?

[RoninaThorstone]

What does America have anything to do with this?

Also, that.
I don't even know what to make of any of this mess of a post.

[Fencers]

Do you really want to get me started on what a company should deliver for a sub fee compared to some other companies not delivering who charge the same fee?

I am not quite sure what you are aiming at here.

The post bit you replied to was intimating that Rift, though a solid game, isn't unique enough to bring in hordes of players willing to pay for the game. Quite obvious with but a simple logon into Rift. The game has a small population and almost no industry or market buzz.

Rift is World of Warcraft in a different setting. People have Warcraft already. Which is wildly popular... already.

I don't think making 1-50 free so that players can engage in content that is irrelevant now is going to bring in the masses.

Rift can continue to appeal to a small, relatively niche base as it does now. Or they go total f2p such as Tera, which is BOOMING by the way since going to f2p.

Take LoL for example. Pretty popular free-to-play game. They have to roll out a new super duper cool champion every patch to maintain funding.

Erm, no. No, they don't. Riot/LOL are owned by one of the richest and largest companies on the planet with the most played online game by far. There marketing and operational budget dwarf entire publishers.

Now the older champions get out dated..screwed if you got one of them. Free-to-play is the illusion of being free.

That is not how LOL works at all. Older champions do not go "out of date".

The most commonly pick/banned champions in ranked and professional play still include the original champions almost 3 years old now. Many from beta.

Not to mention LOL has the widest spread of picks/bans of any competitive MOBA. With nearly ever champion picked or banned on any given professional tournament as recently as last weekend. Which is an indication that every champion is viable in a particular composition.

The most banned/pinked highest win rate champ in all of League? Twisted Fate.

Lastly, Riot update older champions continually along side newer ones. Here are some of the older champions which had visual &/or mechanical overhauls in ADDITION to the continuous balance alongside all other champions;

http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Ashe
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Annie
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Dr._Mundo
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Ezreal
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Jax
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Nidalee
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Katarina
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Olaf
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Soraka
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Tryndamere
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Twisted_Fate
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Xin_Zhao
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Trundle
http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Karma

[Keep in mind the above still receive skin support too.]

Riot are also overhauling newer champions released in the last year such as Fiora, Sejuani and Rengar. Apart from routine balance tweaking.

The game of League of Legends succeeds because Riot/Tencent provided a no-bullshit F2P game players want to spend money on.

It is the ideal business model and support when done correctly.

To experience half the features I get for a $60 a year sub fee with Rift in other F2P games I would have to pay up. This is a socialist theory of gaming that will fail.

I can't name many F2P games where that is the case. The only obvious ones are EQ2 and SWTOR. Which are the minority of F2P MMOs.

[Lathais]

Please show me this shining success story in the MMO field? You guys mentioned there are like 20 F2P mmo's. Where is this king of the F2P mmo's just dominating the space?

Of late I have tried a few F2P games. Path of Exile is excellent, while not an MMO like these other games, it is a great game that is F2P. They have also had at least 2 people so far pay $1000 to help design an in game weapon/armor that went in with the latest patch. People that pay for things like additional character slots or expanded bank tabs or "costume" peices are actually probably more likely to stay loyal to a game than someone paying a sub. Someone paying a sub can simply say, "oh well, I can always start it up again and I've lost nothing." Whereas the F2P guy that made a conscious decision to purchase those things will say, "I want to get my monies worth."

I also recently tried DCUO which is a little closer to a real MMO but a little moer console fighter/action based. I saw tons of people, of all levels, happily playing, with constant updates to the game.

There are several other games that are actually MMOs that are still being successful as F2P. Coming from me this is a lot because I do still kind of hold F2P games in that, "Well they failed so they went F2P" category. However, there is evidence in games like GW and GW2 that B2P is successful, if it was not, they would not have made GW2 follow the same model. LotRO is still going strong to name another. Hell, even SWtoR with their super crappy model has a profitable amount of players still playing and paying. There are several more out there still chugging along, making money, slowly bringing in more players as more people adapt to the idea of F2P and try them then see they are really not that bad. The good ones also still have sub options, so it isn't like the game is really entirely F2P, it's Free to Try, then to get to the real game you still gotta pay up in some way, and the really good ones offer freemium, a sub option that gives you all you could need unless you really wanted to go crazy with cosmetic stuff.

[RoninaThorstone]

This is a socialist theory of gaming that will fail.

I completely missed this gem. He tacked it on after I quoted him.

Why would you do that to yourself? You sound insane. If anything, f2p is far more capitalistic since it places more choice in the players had as to how much money they want to spend. If the producer deviates from what the free market wants, that DLC/Microtransaction/Adventure pack that they worked on doesn't sell as well as they hoped and they suffer for it.

[Lathais]

I don't think making 1-50 free so that players can engage in content that is irrelevant now is going to bring in the masses.

That right there is your problem with the view that making 1-50 would make no difference. It is irrelevant to YOU, but to someone who has never played the game before it is totally relevant. If 1-50 were free, would we get masses of players? Probably not, however, you would get some. When there is no risk and if they are in a "holding pattern" in WoW, just logging in for raids, I bet quite a few would at least level to 50 and see what the raiding is like. It's only irrelevant if you actually played and raided before SL. To those that did not, it is still great content, with great design, easy to catch up gear-wise and still fun the first time. That taste would then possibly get them to purchase SL and Sub up. It's just expanding Rift Lite. In the same way that when it was released 1-20 was "irrelevant" now 1-50 is.

Also, to add to my previous post, I also tried Tera a little this weekend, and man, it was PACKED. Competition for mobs in lower zones, general and area chat had lots of things going on from newbies getting questions answered quickly an politely to your common everyday trolling, but nothing much worse than what I see in Rift already.

[Fencers]

It is irreverent in the game.

Theme park MMO content is designed to expire. That is what makes a bimodal endgame work.

[Orange Joe]

That right there is your problem with the view that making 1-50 would make no difference. It is irrelevant to YOU, but to someone who has never played the game before it is totally relevant. If 1-50 were free, would we get masses of players? Probably not, however, you would get some. When there is no risk and if they are in a "holding pattern" in WoW, just logging in for raids, I bet quite a few would at least level to 50 and see what the raiding is like. It's only irrelevant if you actually played and raided before SL. To those that did not, it is still great content, with great design, easy to catch up gear-wise and still fun the first time. That taste would then possibly get them to purchase SL and Sub up. It's just expanding Rift Lite. In the same way that when it was released 1-20 was "irrelevant" now 1-50 is.

You are reading something that isn't there. She never said it wouldn't bring in some people. Just that it wouldn't bring in the masses.

[Lathais]

It is irreverent in the game.

Theme park MMO content is designed to expire. That is what makes a bimodal endgame work.

It is irrelevant to YOU, not to someone who has not played it. Yes, content is designed to expire after you have run it and gotten everything you want out of it, if you have not, it has not expired. Yes, that is what makes bimodal endgame work, I am agreeing there, however, if you have not done it yet it is still relevant.

Hell, I actually still see people doing the old weekly raids for achieves and PA, at level 60. I would not call that irrelevant. It's active and being used by current players even at level 60. If it were irrelevant, noone would run it at all. It is irrelevant to you and me, yes. To someone who has never played before though, they'd have a blast.

[Fencers]

Anything f2p will have a lot of turnover, that is a given. Expecting the 50 content to just push people all of a sudden to start gobbling up SL xpacks... erm, EQ2 has been trying this for years.

It's still small. It still putters along.

Highly doubtful these hypnotically new players are going to join the hypothetical 1-50 f2p Rift where they level up in a very traditional/standard way, gear through dungeons in a traditional/standard way and then congregate to run raid content eclipsed by 5 man dungeons in the expansion Trion are sorta dangling like a hypothetical carrot.

People have better options than that in the current market. Lots of them.

[Lathais]

You are reading something that isn't there. She never said it wouldn't bring in some people. Just that it wouldn't bring in the masses.

No, I got her point, her point was that it is irrelevant content, which is only true if you have played it, farmed it and gotten everything you want out of it. The fact that 60s still run it for achieves and costume pieces tells me it's plenty relevant, just not to her(me either for that matter, but it's relevant to plenty of people.

---------- Post added 2013-03-26 at 12:47 PM ----------

Anything f2p will have a lot of turnover, that is a given. Expecting the 50 content to just push people all of a sudden to start gobbling up SL xpacks... erm, EQ2 has been trying this for years.

It's still small. It still putters along.

Highly doubtful these hypnotically new players are going to join the hypothetical 1-50 f2p Rift where they level up in a very traditional/standard way, gear through dungeons in a traditional/standard way and then congregate to run raid content eclipsed by 5 man dungeons in the expansion Trion are sorta dangling like a hypothetical carrot.

People have better options than that in the current market. Lots of them.

IMO, there is not a better option than Rift, even just 1-50, especially if it was entirely free. Definitely not lots that is better than Rift, even just 1-50 Rift. If there IS please tell me what it is so I can go play it.

[Orange Joe]

No, I got her point, her point was that it is irrelevant content, which is only true if you have played it, farmed it and gotten everything you want out of it. The fact that 60s still run it for achieves and costume pieces tells me it's plenty relevant, just not to her(me either for that matter, but it's relevant to plenty of people.

---------- Post added 2013-03-26 at 12:47 PM ----------



IMO, there is not a better option than Rift, even just 1-50, especially if it was entirely free. Definitely not lots that is better than Rift, even just 1-50 Rift. If there IS please tell me what it is so I can go play it.

I haven't done much raiding at 50. You can be sure if I do get the exp pack i'll will skip everything I can to get caught up to end game. I agree with fencers on this. The 1-50 content is not what will draw players in.


Thats like saying MC is still relevant because people go there for transmog.

[Fencers]

IMO, there is not a better option than Rift, even just 1-50, especially if it was entirely free. Definitely not lots that is better than Rift, even just 1-50 Rift. If there IS please tell me what it is so I can go play it.

I am talking about restrictiveness. "Fun" is personal and up to you basically.

[Kelimbror]

Also, to add to my previous post, I also tried Tera a little this weekend, and man, it was PACKED. Competition for mobs in lower zones, general and area chat had lots of things going on from newbies getting questions answered quickly an politely to your common everyday trolling, but nothing much worse than what I see in Rift already.

In the top left side of the screen it shows what channel you are on, you can switch to lower populated channels and it actually makes questing a lot more enjoyable. Everytime you use a teleport or go to a city you are more than likely placed back in channel 1. Additionally, it's a good way to get away from griefers if you rolled on a PvP server.

[Lathais]

In the top left side of the screen it shows what channel you are on, you can switch to lower populated channels and it actually makes questing a lot more enjoyable. Everytime you use a teleport or go to a city you are more than likely placed back in channel 1. Additionally, it's a good way to get away from griefers if you rolled on a PvP server.

Cool, thanks for the tip. I stopped playing on PvP servers a while back though. It really does not enhance my game experience in any way as I get no enjoyment out of ganking. My opinion may be wrong, but after playing WoW, Rift, DCUO and a few others on a PvP server, I just don't want it anymore. I want to get in, get what I have planned for that day done and move on. If I want to PvP there are BGs and whatnot for that. Thank you Rift for faction unity and getting me to see this

Also, competition for mobs is, IMO, not a bad thing. I actually just sent one of the people I kept repeatadly competing with an invite and we grouped up for a bit. So lots of people is not a bad thing, I don't want to be playing by myself. Plus, reading all the chat, I see questions asked that either I would have to ask later and now don't or I get to answer someones question and make friends. It is good to know the option is there in case it does get to be TOO packed at some point.

Have any other good tips or seen a good starter guide/FAQ anywhere? PM if so, so we can quit cluttering this thread.

---------- Post added 2013-03-26 at 02:10 PM ----------

I am talking about restrictiveness. "Fun" is personal and up to you basically.

Wait, what restrictiveness? Were talking about the same game you and I played and raided in and paid to do so for free. It keeps old content relevant, people running it and is basically the same thing as Rift Lite. Actually, you kinda bank on not masses using it cause that costs you bandwidth, however, it would be the single best free trial on the market. An entire game, for free. You really think that would not draw people? Even if they don't sub, which I am some would, it gets people talking about the game. With no other real marketing strategy other than word of mouth and a few banner ads here and there, there is something for people to talk about and something new and interesting that will get people to look at those banner ads.

[Slipmat]

Anyone that makes a big deal out of having to pay a paltry 7-10 Euro a month for a sub needs to rethink their spending habits.

You'd probably use that amount on texts or data usage on your smartphone per week or a Big Mac meal at Mc Donalds

Anyhow keep going, searching for this mythical F2P Utopia where you will never have to buy anything, ever ever, i'll still be the smug git happily playing Rift knowing my sub gives me full access to every facet of the game, even if i don't play some aspects of it too often, the choice is there

[Lathais]

Anyone that makes a big deal out of having to pay a paltry 7-10 Euro a month for a sub needs to rethink their spending habits.

You'd probably use that amount on texts or data usage on your smartphone per week or a Big Mac meal at Mc Donalds

Anyhow keep going, searching for this mythical F2P Utopia where you will never have to buy anything, ever ever, i'll still be the smug git happily playing Rift knowing my sub gives me full access to every facet of the game, even if i don't play some aspects of it too often, the choice is there

Oh, don't get me wrong, as long as I am playing I will be subbing too. I still think the sub option is the superior option and the F2P model that is best is the one that offers freemium with a sub. I still love subs and think they are worth it. However, it is clear that the market is shifting and that consumers want "F2P". I still hate the term F2P as it is never truly free. Not to get the real game experience. Which is why I think Rift should simply extend it's trial to 50 so that it is still not really a F2P game, just a game with a really really good trial.

[Kelimbror]

Anyone that makes a big deal out of having to pay a paltry 7-10 Euro a month for a sub needs to rethink their spending habits.

Not the point

You'd probably use that amount on texts or data usage on your smartphone per week or a Big Mac meal at Mc Donalds

Oh look, it's a man...made of straw, beating a dead horse of irrelevancy. That's a strange picture.

Anyhow keep going, searching for this mythical F2P Utopia where you will never have to buy anything, ever ever, i'll still be the smug git happily playing Rift knowing my sub gives me full access to every facet of the game, even if i don't play some aspects of it too often, the choice is there

Lovely swooping gesture you've made to villainize people who like F2P models as wanting to 'never buy anything, ever, ever'. Quit being over dramatic and actuall participate in the dialogue. Maybe you would see some of its merit if you weren't so hastily dismissing it.

I hope Rift doesn't suffer the same fate all sub games have recently that aren't WoW. We used to be able to justify subscriptions with a service and content provided, but it looks like the general paying public aren't agreeing with that reasoning anymore.

[RoninaThorstone]

Anyone that makes a big deal out of having to pay a paltry 7-10 Euro a month for a sub needs to rethink their spending habits.

You'd probably use that amount on texts or data usage on your smartphone per week or a Big Mac meal at Mc Donalds

Anyhow keep going, searching for this mythical F2P Utopia where you will never have to buy anything, ever ever, i'll still be the smug git happily playing Rift knowing my sub gives me full access to every facet of the game, even if i don't play some aspects of it too often, the choice is there

What about people who would be willing to spend 5 euros? or 6? Or 200? A subscription is a flat fee that is completely inflexible. That inflexibly costs the developer money. If you could get 50,000 players who on average spend 4 euros a month in addition to your subscribers, you've made money. Not to mention, when a game goes f2p it almost always gains subscribers. Increased populations result in faster queues for battlegrounds and LFG, a better AH, easier to expand your friends lists, ect ect ect. The benefits of having high population out weighs the losses of not getting slightly less on average than 7-10 euros (especially when you have more people playing. That's why even bad f2p models like swtor rake in money. They've gained 2 million accounts since they went f2p). And then, when you fill your cash shop with sun glasses and flying pan mace models there are those who are REALLY into your game and they spend 300 euros.

Also, who is looking for a game where you never have to buy anything? No one. NO ONE IS DOING THAT. YOU ARE TALKING AT A IMAGINARY POSTER.

[Slipmat]

Sorry if my way of thinking doesn't extend to scounging, i said my opinion and that's it. I'm perfectly happy paying a sub, i know what i'm getting and i'm quite happy to keep paying as long as Trion delivers on frequent content.

Rift has survived through at least three of the most hyped Messiah MMO's and came out the other side, i see no reason why it should adopt an increased F2P model from 1-49 or any such thing.

Will it ever change? i don't know, you don't know, it's up to Lars Buttler to decide that.