[Megathread] Wildstar - Now F2P

[Northy]

Some PvP info. : p

http://www.wildstar-online.com/en/ne...alysis_pvp.php

Wildstar is gonna be the best MMORPG E-Sport out there. Love the rating system, and variety of PvP options (Arena, Battlegrounds, Warplots). No one will want to watch a game where all you can do to PvP is world PvP, like in Elder Scrolls Online. As a PvP nerd, this post sold me. My only beef so far is the fact that there's only 6 classes, but at least it will make class balance issues very easy to fix.

[Delanath]

Six classes, sure, but two roles per class as well. I think 12 is a pretty decent number. One thing I'm interested in is whether they'll encourage tanking specs in PvP. Imagine if they actually made tanks viable in PvP? Maybe tie them into more of a support class that breaks CC's and deals out decent CC or something. That'd be fun.

[Deleted]

Well, the pvp sounds fun. I really hope the game will be f2p now, because it's still pve in the game and they can promise the world to pvp but time will tell if pve will be the main focus in the end... like most mmos. With f2p you can wait and see what happens and just download to try it out eventually after launch. P2p with bying box+subfee... will take more than that, b2p is better option if so cause just a one time fee

[Kelimbror]

Well, the pvp sounds fun. I really hope the game will be f2p now

The game should really be B2P, with a cosmetic shop, with a sub option for lots of bonuses and free currency. Unfortunately most of the people getting behind this game sound like the same boneheads who told all the SWTOR developers pre launch to not include features that WoW had (like a cross server dungeon finder) so they listened and launched the game in a dismal state.

On the unofficial forums, there's a ridiculously long thread of people debating the payment model and a lot of it is filled with "Subscriptions are the only way a game is good, screw you for saying that this should be B2P or F2P. F2P games suck."

[RoninaThorstone]

On the unofficial forums, there's a ridiculously long thread of people debating the payment model and a lot of it is filled with "Subscriptions are the only way a game is good, screw you for saying that this should be B2P or F2P. F2P games suck."

For your sake I really hope it launches as f2p/b2p.

Almost every MMO that has launched with a subscription lost 80%+ of its players a few months post launch and then had to transition to a better model like f2p/b2p to save their game.

[Deleted]

The game should really be B2P, with a cosmetic shop, with a sub option for lots of bonuses and free currency. Unfortunately most of the people getting behind this game sound like the same boneheads who told all the SWTOR developers pre launch to not include features that WoW had (like a cross server dungeon finder) so they listened and launched the game in a dismal state.

On the unofficial forums, there's a ridiculously long thread of people debating the payment model and a lot of it is filled with "Subscriptions are the only way a game is good, screw you for saying that this should be B2P or F2P. F2P games suck."

F2P games suck. If there is anything in the game that cannot be obtained ingame, it sucks. These kind of things suck in wow aswell, and not a day goes by while I don't think of it. Seriously, dev's, be happy with your sub fee's, and give us a frikkin' game that lets players feel immersed.

[Deleted]

Six classes, sure, but two roles per class as well. I think 12 is a pretty decent number. One thing I'm interested in is whether they'll encourage tanking specs in PvP. Imagine if they actually made tanks viable in PvP? Maybe tie them into more of a support class that breaks CC's and deals out decent CC or something. That'd be fun.

12 different roles and thats if there is only 2 per class and hybrid builds arent viable.. sounds good enough to me.

[Kelimbror]

F2P games suck. If there is anything in the game that cannot be obtained ingame, it sucks. These kind of things suck in wow aswell, and not a day goes by while I don't think of it. Seriously, dev's, be happy with your sub fee's, and give us a frikkin' game that lets players feel immersed.

There seems to be a logical disconnect in your statement. You say 'F2P games suck', then go on to talk about something that has nothing to do with the payment model...then ramble on telling developers to be happy with their sub fees for immersion's sake...

wtf are you on about?

---------- Post added 2013-03-11 at 09:07 AM ----------

For your sake I really hope it launches as f2p/b2p.

Almost every MMO that has launched with a subscription lost 80%+ of its players a few months post launch and then had to transition to a better model like f2p/b2p to save their game.

Yes. I'm lobbying for it to be B2P with a sub option. I think that is really the way forward. The funny part is that I'm arguing in the best interest of the game and not out of personal opinion, but people are freaking out. Apparently they don't like being told that their forced desire of a misconception that only games with subscriptions are good are going to ruin a game.

You know, like above.

[RoninaThorstone]

F2P games suck. If there is anything in the game that cannot be obtained ingame, it sucks. These kind of things suck in wow aswell, and not a day goes by while I don't think of it. Seriously, dev's, be happy with your sub fee's, and give us a frikkin' game that lets players feel immersed.

Just out of curiosity, which f2p mmos have you played and how many hours of each?

1. Which is why many f2p games have a in game method for obtaining cash currency or the items they buy.
2. They can't be happy if they don't have enough. When you only have subscribers and not f2pers + subscribers you end up with people complaining about long queues, empty worlds, nothing to do ect. So your subscribers quit.
3. Two of the most immersive MMOs are probably lotro and swtor, story driven mmos, which are f2p. Not sure what that has to do with payment model.

[Deleted]

F2P games suck. If there is anything in the game that cannot be obtained ingame, it sucks. These kind of things suck in wow aswell, and not a day goes by while I don't think of it. Seriously, dev's, be happy with your sub fee's, and give us a frikkin' game that lets players feel immersed.

youre going to at least need to buy the game.. the amount of content theyre planning only fits with a sub model.. like new end game content every single month or less for the next 3 years after launch. Does any free to play mmo offer monthly content updates with new end game quests, raids etc or should it remain free to play but you need to buy content dlc each month.

[RoninaThorstone]

youre going to at least need to buy the game.. the amount of content theyre planning only fits with a sub model.. like new end game content every single month or less for the next 3 years after launch. Does any free to play mmo offer monthly content updates with new end game quests, raids etc or should it remain free to play but you need to buy content dlc each month.

inb4 new daily hub every month

but srsly, every MMO promises that.

[SirRobin]

The game should really be B2P, with a cosmetic shop, with a sub option for lots of bonuses and free currency. Unfortunately most of the people getting behind this game sound like the same boneheads who told all the SWTOR developers pre launch to not include features that WoW had (like a cross server dungeon finder) so they listened and launched the game in a dismal state.

On the unofficial forums, there's a ridiculously long thread of people debating the payment model and a lot of it is filled with "Subscriptions are the only way a game is good, screw you for saying that this should be B2P or F2P. F2P games suck."

The revenue model always seems to turn into a hot button topic with mumorpugers. I hope Carbine launches WildStar as B2P or F2P mostly because history has not been on the side of P2P's lately. While I personally prefer P2P, I would much rather Carbine plan around B2P or F2P, both with MT of course, than have to spend months converting it from P2P after launch.

---------- Post added 2013-03-11 at 08:30 AM ----------

inb4 new daily hub every month

but srsly, every MMO promises that.

Yeah, while I'll keep my fingers crossed, I can't think of one that's managed new content anywhere near as fast as they were claiming before launch.

[Kelimbror]

but srsly, every MMO promises that.

Yeah it's the only thing they've said that I just refuse to even start to believe until it happens for a year straight. I can admit they at least approach it differently, so it seems like it really is an intended goal and not some fluff speech to garner attention/players. They specifically talk about how the largest percentage of people playing MMO's now aren't raiders or PvPers, but solo-mmo gamers. People like me.

We like to progress our characters outside of an organized and scheduled time, by doing things on our own. That is what MMO's have evolved into. For every forum goer that complains that we need to be using archaic concepts of no LFRs and LFDs to actually talk to people is the MMO equivalent of a social butterfly and don't represent the reality of people.

They have spoken directly in recognizing this and want to make sure a core of the gameplay is focused on developing for that audience. This is where there claim for new story/single player content updates is coming from. Now...I admit that after seeing WoW's daily hubs, I can't really imagine a way of doing it that won't feel similar...unless it is one-off quest chains, but then I have huge doubts on them being able to keep up a pace on that kind of development.

We shall see.

[Deleted]

inb4 new daily hub every month

but srsly, every MMO promises that.

lol no they dont. Can you please show me examples of dev's saying this multiple times that they expect monthly updates with new end game content for group and solo play.

devs promise updates.. not content patches. If you dont want to believe them, then fair enough.. but i dont remember any mmo promising that amount of content on a regular basis.

[RoninaThorstone]

lol no they dont. Can you please show me examples of dev's saying this multiple times that they expect monthly updates with new end game content for group and solo play.

Swtor "6 week content cycle" resulting in daily hubs and cartel market updates
Rift and WoW always saying they are going to up their content push, aka dailycraft. (rift averages about 1 raid per 1.5 months or something so they are closest)
Firefall and their 1 month pve content updates post 22nd of this month
ect ect ect

They use an umbrella term like "content" which is meaningless, as it means different things to different people.

[papajohn4]

Yes. I'm lobbying for it to be B2P with a sub option. I think that is really the way forward. The funny part is that I'm arguing in the best interest of the game and not out of personal opinion, but people are freaking out. Apparently they don't like being told that their forced desire of a misconception that only games with subscriptions are good are going to ruin a game.

You know, like above.

Hey Kittyvicious, I have read almost all pages in this thread and first of all I have to say I agree with you on the pvp part..many times I wanted to login and comment on the argument about "world pvp" but I resisted as being pointless...

Anyway, I disagree on the payment model btw. First of all I believe that all developers prefer a sub based model with steady income much more than f2p/b2p models. It is better for them to plan and grow their game. Any game that starts out or transitions to F2P is drastically different from a game built for a subscription. I prefer subscriptions, and I want to play subscription games. I have no problem if other people prefer F2P and can’t afford to play a subscription game. If the game has not enough quality to keep people playing/paying then is the developers fault and not business model.

Also we don't need to forget that a game does not need millions subscribers to stay profitable..a solid 400-500k subs can bring a good steady profit to the company(CCP-EVE). Most of the f2p games didn't turned to f2p model because they found out its better business model but because their game failed to keep people interested and they had to change the business model in order to survive and we all know that after that the game have changed. I see the patch notes of swtor and 90% is about their cartel shop..lotro next item in shop will be the One ring and goes on..Gw2 is a game you can "finish" like a single player game since it does not have further character/gear progression and so b2p was the most fair model as I doubt anyone would sub after some months.

wow is another story...blizzard managed to release a quality game back in time where there was little to non competition in MMOs and managed to build a solid playerbase during the good days of vanilla/tbc. Friends, guilds, feeling comfortable, memories, nostalgia is what keeping wow subs up and not the quality itself.

Generally speaking , the MMO market is in decline and we have yet to see a real quality MMO that will be worthy of subscription(worthy to keep 400-500k people)...by asking for new MMOs to be b2p,f2p is just because we do not believe that they will have the quality to keep us for very long..we are all very pesimistic about that but sometime a real quality MMO will come to us from nowhere and we will all be eager to subscribe for long long time

[Deleted]

Swtor "6 week content cycle" resulting in daily hubs and cartel market updates
Rift and WoW always saying they are going to up their content push, aka dailycraft. (rift averages about 1 raid per 1.5 months or something so they are closest)
Firefall and their 1 month pve content updates post 22nd of this month
ect ect ect

They use an umbrella term like "content" which is meaningless, as it means different things to different people.

wait so what youre saying is that it does happen.

[RoninaThorstone]

Generally speaking , the MMO market is in decline and we have yet to see a real quality MMO that will be worthy of subscription(worthy to keep 400-500k people)...by asking for new MMOs to be b2p,f2p is just because we do not believe that they will have the quality to keep us for very long..we are all very pesimistic about that but sometime a real quality MMO will come to us from nowhere and we will all be eager to subscribe for long long time

Or maybe it's because the market is fragmenting and some of us are beginning to play more than one MMO and thus a subscription feels like a trap.
Why should I pay 15/mo? I would rather pay for content I actually play / want.

And it places the responsibility squarely on the developers shoulder to make content I am willing to pay for, making them more responsive to their player base.

---------- Post added 2013-03-11 at 02:12 PM ----------

wait so what youre saying is that it does happen.

Yes, developers give you lots of dailies and call it 'content'.

(with the exception of rift but they appear to be slowing down)

[Deleted]

Yes, developers give you lots of dailies and call it 'content'.

(with the exception of rift but they appear to be slowing down)

They use rift as one of the bench marks.. they want monthly content which adds to the story (aimed at solo play) which is not dailies. Also raid changes can happen weekly.

[papajohn4]

Or maybe it's because the market is fragmenting and some of us are beginning to play more than one MMO and thus a subscription feels like a trap.
Why should I pay 15/mo? I would rather pay for content I actually play / want.

And it places the responsibility squarely on the developers shoulder to make content I am willing to pay for, making them more responsive to their player base.



---------- Post added 2013-03-11 at 02:12 PM ----------



Yes, developers give you lots of dailies and call it 'content'.

(with the exception of rift but they appear to be slowing down)

Whats the difference then?If the MMO has content that you are interested to play -quality MMO- then why not to pay the monthly sub which btw is very cheap considering the hours of entertainment you get. From the other hand if the game is not interesting for you to play, would you play it just because it is free? Either the game is interesting to play/pay or its not. Also I don't see any f2p game that separate their content and sell it..they don't say if you like dungeons pay 5 euro for dungeons and if you don't like dailies you will save 5 euro for not buying them. Is not how they work.

I agree on dailies part...the 2013 MMO joke is that developers consider dailies as content and the more dailies you need to do until you reach the goal the more content they think that you get..And thats why the MMOs fail now, because they are dailycraft and hope people will pay them 15 per month to do their dailies..and then they think that is the business model that screw them