[Megathread] Wildstar - Now F2P

[RoninaThorstone]

Don't use ridiculously rare initialisms

It's not rare for those who have been playing / foruming in w*.

[Elim Garak]

And likely cosmetic goods/boosts. Even WoW has gone down the road of cosmetic goods and boosts for the next patch.

Nothing wrong with that either.

It's not rare for those who have been playing / foruming in w*.

You just described rare. Plus not everyone who plays knows about it and not everyone visits forums in w*.

[Deleted]

There have been plenty of good MMOs. The problem has never truly been the quality of those MMOs.

Thats your opinion. My friends and i say the exact opposite. SWTOR and Tera were the ones on top, still not good enough to support a sub model.

[syar]

Different times. At that point, MMOs weren't being produced like they were going out of style. Nowadays, it seems like every other month another MMO is coming out of the woodwork, going P2P, failing and switching to some F2P or B2P hybrid. Notice that the one game that said from the gate it wasn't going to have a subscription (GW2) sold crazy amounts of copies of their game. TOR sold a shit load of copies purely based on the names of Star Wars and Bioware. But, honestly, how many of these P2P games sell a ton of copies? How many have been able to maintain a subscription model? How many of them start out with a fairly large number only to wind up tanking subscriptions over the course of a couple months? We're basing our assumptions on what has happened over the course of the past number of years.

Yes but I can't relate all those to the subscription model. I can see TOR was a failed attempt because of a lot of things ( bad optimization, no endgame, to much zoning , nothing new on the combat front etc), also I see GW2as a success and a good game. But in my brain that does not relate to whether its F2P or P2P or B2P, its about the quality of the game itself.
Maybe its just me.

[Edge-]

Nothing wrong with that either.

So, you have no problem with a cash shop? What's the benefit to paying a subscription on top of a fully stocked cash shop then? Part of the benefit of a subscription based game is supposed to be not needing to deal with a cash shop. At least that's how I've heard it argued on multiple occasions.

[zed zebes]

If you use the terms hardcore or casual then you immediately get kicked out of any discussion worth a bit of merit.

This business model news does sadden me, as I had been interested in the game. At a certain point, it felt like Carbine decided to please every burn-out and internet troll out there. The whole mob tagging issue was ridiculous. Overcomplicating a system just because of some idea on socialization that doesn't reflect normalized social interactions or anything but a few reclusive murmurings? Eeeh. That was my first warning, but the housing, and the movement, and classes still interested me.

Gaffney's comment:

The important part about going F2P or Subscription isn’t the revenue model, says Jeremy, it’s “whether the game’s any good. Quality speaks louder than cost.”

Is what worries me though. If you are being truly objective, this simply hasn't been true. There have been good MMOs out there, and the top MMO (WoW), has always been a flawed game. Success has a lot to do with business model and timing. TO really see the difference, you have to look towards Asia, and then look to see how things are changing in the west.

There are multiple MMOs in Asia, especially China. The biggest, most popular MMO is in China. There are always new MMOs coming out and there is competition between the games. The sub model is also less prevalent. Sure, Lineage 1 is still big in Korea, but the Asian region is mostly ruled by the F2P set. It is also more varied, and (as mentioned), more competitive. The west was ruled by WoW for years. There was this monolith game and scraps for everyone else. The west has also been sub-dominant until recently.

However, as sub has gone away, there are more and more types of MMOs being played. The WoW userbase goes down and it splits off in multiple directions.

This is not a coincidence. A subscription has a mental/financial hold on a player. Every month, the player must justify spending that sub. In games with a lot of time investment already, subs increase that time investment by constantly shaking the player and saying "GET YOUR $15 WORTH!" The other thing subs do is increase devotion to a game. At a certain point, I realized I was never going to get my money's worth with WoW, but it made it harder to leave the game because I had sunk so much financial investment and so much time investment into the game that I was more attached to the thing that I would have been otherwise.

So what the sub does it anchors players. There are some players who pay multiple subs, but those are very rare. And it's not like there haven't been good games that come along in the west during the sub-dominant days. Rift was basically BC-era WoW but with new features and quality of life improvements. Everyone bitching about easy mode WotLK or about everything in CATA could have gone to Rift, but they didn't. There wasn't much a quality difference and the games had similar philosophies behind them. But there was no giant player shift.

The psychological differences between P2P and F2P/B2P are why other markets have had more MMOs and more competition and the US has been under WoW's shadow forever. It's not really quality differences, because though being good is a prerequisite to success, it hasn't been the determining factor for success. Gaffney's statement is not in tune with that, and if they truly believe that statement, then I am worried for the game's future.

[notorious98]

I posted multi times it was my personal opinion, don't get all pissy about it. You making yourself look bad.

Everyone has different taste & already stated at the bottom of my post. I could say some really harsh things about Rift, but I know better & it goes no where and its not worth the infraction at all.

Who got pissy? First, I never said your opinion was wrong. But your opinion is based off of misinformation. You said that you feel every F2P game goes P2W and that's not true. Unless you have an extremely broad view of what P2W is. You said that your opinion is that only good MMOs can support a subscription. Except that "good" is subjective. There are plenty of "good" MMOs. It's usually not the quality of the MMO that causes people to leave. It's usually the unfamiliarity of the game. You said you feel Wildstar could be supported by a smaller audience, which it could. However, your opinion that 3-5 million people isn't a "huge playerbase" is also totally misinformed. Considering WoW is the only subscription MMO to be able to sustain a playerbase over 1 million people for more than a year (at least in the western world) means that 3-5 million people is a metric fuck ton in the MMO universe.

[Elim Garak]

So, you have no problem with a cash shop? What's the benefit to paying a subscription on top of a fully stocked cash shop then? Part of the benefit of a subscription based game is supposed to be not needing to deal with a cash shop. At least that's how I've heard it argued on multiple occasions.

How do you need to deal with a cash shop in wow? I don't.

[notorious98]

Thats your opinion. My friends and i say the exact opposite. SWTOR and Tera were the ones on top, still not good enough to support a sub model.

Uh, what? I'm saying that the quality of many MMOs has little to do with whether or not they are capable of supporting a subscription model. If you feel that TOR and Tera were great, then you're agreeing with me.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes but I can't relate all those to the subscription model. I can see TOR was a failed attempt because of a lot of things ( bad optimization, no endgame, to much zoning , nothing new on the combat front etc), also I see GW2as a success and a good game. But in my brain that does not relate to whether its F2P or P2P or B2P, its about the quality of the game itself.
Maybe its just me.

Just wait and pay attention to when TESO and Wildstar come out. See how long they maintain their subscriptions (assuming TESO is sub-based, that is).

[jearle]

I'm currently in the closed beta and while I won't reveal anything specific, I don't see what could possibly be so captivating about this game to support another monthly fee MMO.

- Graphics are better than WoW in some aspects, worse in others.
- Controls are very responsive, but not as sharp as WoW's (controls is a big issue for me in most new MMOs, except Firefall, which coined it very well.)
- Quests are quests. Go there kill/collect stuff + random variations of this and that.
- Combat abilities are kind of over-thought and unclear at times, and you're not always sure something specific even happened when you use them.
- Combat itself is like GW2's, more focus on avoidance and fighting + CC than just CC + fighting. It's more satisfying.
- Dungeons are fun, but nothing out of the ordinary, unless you consider the fact that they're new content in a new world (not of Warcraft)

Haven't gotten to raiding, player housing or PVP yet, but the only thing that really captivates me out of all that is the guild vs guild PVP where you build your own fortresses and attack each other.

Player housing? Pandaria farm with extra perks. In the end, a futile pursuit.

I wouldn't pay a monthly fee for this game, but I would buy2play if I like the end product, since it does have a solid foundation, and I like the new lore.

Even for WoW I only come back every 3-4 months to experience the latest content patch(es), otherwise there's nothing to do in this game except PVP, and I'm not paying 15$/month just to PVP.

I think your post was meant to be negative, but personally this sounds like a decent amount for 15 bucks a month.

Aside from end game, everyone knows that end game needs to be thought out and executed.

[Edge-]

How do you need to deal with a cash shop in wow? I don't.

The simple existence of a cash shop is "dealing with it" to a lot of hardcore "Sub only!" folks. Hell, look at the shitstorm that is still going on about WoW integrating the cash shop into the game. People flipped their shit and lost their damn minds.

I'm of a similar mind as you though, I'm simply bringing arguments I hear all too often.

[syar]

That would be great. I would love another MMO to be successful.

It's just that there's a lot of concerns that need to be addressed... Now, I know you are thinking, "yeah. They have 6 months!" but I am talking about core issues like movement, animations, the way quests and lore are presented, most of the game. They are going back to basically redo a fair amount of their game now but like... There are many reasons to be concerned for this game and declaring that you will launch as a subscription only game when that has historically been a terrible idea is either delusional or a calculated cash grab.

Now those are the things to worry about! But I can't see concerned players getting upset that -possibly- beta players present issues. Its like we are shifting into the asian market and adapting the mentality of "it doesn't matter if it sucks as long as its free". Now I don't know about you, but I don't want crap even its free, and if its good then I don't mind paying for it.

[papajohn4]

I'd like to see the guys that didn't believe in the game they're making : P

you know what I mean some products are meant to be low quality and go to grab as money as they can...even the great actors are doing movies that going only to dvd and never to cinema and they do that to get some money..

[Elim Garak]

The simple existence of a cash shop is "dealing with it" to a lot of hardcore "Sub only!" folks. Hell, look at the shitstorm that is still going on about WoW integrating the cash shop into the game. People flipped their shit and lost their damn minds.

That's just silly, but they are a minority, so who cares?

I'm of a similar mind as you though, I'm simply bringing arguments I hear all too often.

Just because you hear them too often doesn't mean it's the common opinion. Almost always it's just "one guy spamming".

[Holtzmann]

I'm currently in the closed beta and while I won't reveal anything specific, I don't see what could possibly be so captivating about this game to support another monthly fee MMO.

- Graphics are better than WoW in some aspects, worse in others.
- Controls are very responsive, but not as sharp as WoW's (controls is a big issue for me in most new MMOs, except Firefall, which coined it very well.)
- Quests are quests. Go there kill/collect stuff + random variations of this and that.
- Combat abilities are kind of over-thought and unclear at times, and you're not always sure something specific even happened when you use them.
- Combat itself is like GW2's, more focus on avoidance and fighting + CC than just CC + fighting. It's more satisfying.
- Dungeons are fun, but nothing out of the ordinary, unless you consider the fact that they're new content in a new world (not of Warcraft)

Haven't gotten to raiding, player housing or PVP yet, but the only thing that really captivates me out of all that is the guild vs guild PVP where you build your own fortresses and attack each other.

Player housing? Pandaria farm with extra perks. In the end, a futile pursuit.

I wouldn't pay a monthly fee for this game, but I would buy2play if I like the end product, since it does have a solid foundation, and I like the new lore.

Even for WoW I only come back every 3-4 months to experience the latest content patch(es), otherwise there's nothing to do in this game except PVP, and I'm not paying 15$/month just to PVP.

I have to say, I'd probably pay 15 bucks for that, assuming there were still things to do for progression at the level cap beyond just raiding (which is what's killing me in WoW), which we still don't know yet. I really wish I was selected to the Beta.

Yes, yes. They're going back to the drawing board and reworking a lot of their original ideas. Well, that's what Betas are for. Even WoW's own Beta and first few patches had a ridiculous amounts of iteration going on. That the developers have heard feedback and are attempting to implement solutions to perceived problems is a good thing. I mean, if someone is opening a cupcake shop and offers you and your friends the chance to try out their cupcakes ahead of opening day, and you all tell them you'd rather have chocolate muffins instead of blueberry, would you complain about it when in the opening day you saw lots of chocolate muffins for sale?

[RoninaThorstone]

Now those are the things to worry about! But I can't see concerned players getting upset that -possibly- beta players present issues. Its like we are shifting into the asian market and adapting the mentality of "it doesn't matter if it sucks as long as its free". Now I don't know about you, but I don't want crap even its free, and if its good then I don't mind paying for it.

It's more, "Why pay 15 a month for a game when a game that is as good or better is f2p?".

And yeah, the issues I listed are points of concern for those in the beta. Carbine says they are working on some of them but that's small comfort given the monumental task ahead of them to make the game a cut above all the excellent games in the F2P market, let alone compete with WoW's 9 years of development.

[Deleted]

Uh, what? I'm saying that the quality of many MMOs has little to do with whether or not they are capable of supporting a subscription model. If you feel that TOR and Tera were great, then you're agreeing with me.

I said the exact opposite, that a good game can support a sub model. I did not say they were great, they were on top, but not even close to great, as in good enough to support a sub model.

[Kelimbror]

I have to say, I'd probably pay 15 bucks for that

The problem is that paying a subscription for GW2 combat placed inside of WoW isn't going to cut it for most people as GW2 is B2P and WoW has 9 years of your personal history to abandon. They can't even say that the subscription is for rapid content updates as GW2 does it without requiring a subscription.

So basically they are claiming that somehow their game is more worth it, but functionally it just isn't. Combined with an unknown IP and some marketing magic with a narrator with attitude and humorous videos, there's no real substance to say it is more valuable. Choosing to play this game at this point is just arbitrary to jump on the new MMO simply because it is new.

While there's nothing wrong with that, it's not going to generate anything magical. If they had told me straight up all this pizzaz they've shown would be mine for the low price of $60, I would easily give it a shot. Once my foot was in the door, they could do whatever they wanted to sell me a subscription. And no, one free month isn't a foot in the door. It's looking in through foggy windows.

[Edge-]

Just because you hear them too often doesn't mean it's the common opinion. Almost always it's just "one guy spamming".

I hear it often enough to list it under one of the "common" opinions of those that hate F2P games/think subscription games are inherently better.

[Holtzmann]

The problem is that paying a subscription for GW2 combat placed inside of WoW isn't going to cut it for most people as GW2 is B2P and WoW has 9 years of your personal history to abandon. They can't even say that the subscription is for rapid content updates as GW2 does it without requiring a subscription.

So basically they are claiming that somehow their game is more worth it, but functionally it just isn't. Combined with an unknown IP and some marketing magic with a narrator with attitude and humorous videos, there's no real substance to say it is more valuable. Choosing to play this game at this point is just arbitrary to jump on the new MMO simply because it is new.

While there's nothing wrong with that, it's not going to generate anything magical. If they had told me straight up all this pizzaz they've shown would be mine for the low price of $60, I would easily give it a shot. Once my foot was in the door, they could do whatever they wanted to sell me a subscription. And no, one free month isn't a foot in the door. It's looking in through foggy windows.

Well, that's alright. What works for you might not work for me and vice-versa. The Carbine folks are clearly betting they can make it work with just the folks who do like what they see. I hope they do, but I don't have my hopes too far up. Still, I'm interested in the game and willing to give it a chance.

What they're doing is certainly a big gamble. They're going "Success or Bust!" like SWTOR did, with the knowledge of that game's mistakes. It's risky, but I don't think it's worth the amount of doom and gloom for a game that won't even be out for at least another 6 months and that's been stated to have been refactoring a lot of its systems.