Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 08:01:49 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar" 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 98 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar"  (Read 979289 times)
Segoris
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2637


Reply #945 on: August 21, 2013, 01:07:48 PM

I think the only aspect of the game at launch that was truly, hilariously and utterly clownshoes was the RvR section. 

I'd add class balance (both pve and pvp imo), travel, the AH, really buggy dungeons, itemization (receiving the other faction's drops was always fun), game performance (memory leaks galore), and the UI to that list of clownshoes.

Passable is probably the right word for the crafting professions. The system itself was okay, the professions and products not so much as it was pointless to even train in some of them.

At least they got huttball right.

You can charge for something if it's something no other game offers. People pay for Eve maybe in part due to grandfathering but also because there aren't many direct competitors - if you want to play a game like Eve you have to pay to play Eve. If you want to play a game like SWTOR you can play 50 other games.

This sums it up nicely. Yes, there's the argument that the MMO market is huge, and it is, but that's why subs leave after 3 months.....other fish in the sea and all that. I also am curious about how many of those 3month subs are impulse buyers that buy into marketing and think that a 3month sub will save them money on a shitty game that they end up only playing for a couple of weeks but the sub simply did not run out until 3 months post-launch.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #946 on: August 21, 2013, 01:17:32 PM

This is exactly why you can't use SWTOR of an example of why subs don't work. If the game is good enough to merit a subscription people will pay it, F2P and B2P games are passable but none of them are revolutionary or incredibly fun, they just ARE.


~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #947 on: August 21, 2013, 01:37:57 PM

I'm a little confused to why people seem to think SWTOR was in any way a serious contender. It's like pointing out a boat full of holes and then using it as an example of why you should just build planes instead of boats because obviously boats sink.

It's either the 2nd or 3rd most successful MMO currently in the Western market, depending on where GW2 falls. They're printing money (anecdotal evidence only, but I see no reason to doubt it) since the move to F2P; I'd guess they make more than GW2 off their shop simply because they have far more interesting things for sale. What exactly more do you need for something to be a 'contender'?

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #948 on: August 21, 2013, 01:40:20 PM

I hate to interrupt this SWTOR thread, but there is this new Wildstar video about Crowd Control out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2G_8c-u2qc
Rendakor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10131


Reply #949 on: August 21, 2013, 02:02:11 PM

I hate to interrupt this SWTOR thread, but there is this new Wildstar video about Crowd Control out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2G_8c-u2qc
If by new, you mean posted a page ago.

"i can't be a star citizen. they won't even give me a star green card"
Malakili
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10596


Reply #950 on: August 21, 2013, 02:04:54 PM

I hate to interrupt this SWTOR thread, but there is this new Wildstar video about Crowd Control out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2G_8c-u2qc
If by new, you mean posted a page ago.

Hmm, I even scanned the last page before posting.  Oh well.  I guess I got caught up in all the TOR bullshit.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #951 on: August 21, 2013, 03:21:25 PM

I'm a little confused to why people seem to think SWTOR was in any way a serious contender. It's like pointing out a boat full of holes and then using it as an example of why you should just build planes instead of boats because obviously boats sink.

It's either the 2nd or 3rd most successful MMO currently in the Western market, depending on where GW2 falls. They're printing money (anecdotal evidence only, but I see no reason to doubt it) since the move to F2P; I'd guess they make more than GW2 off their shop simply because they have far more interesting things for sale. What exactly more do you need for something to be a 'contender'?

What was swtor's max number 1million? I'm sure they made a lot of money but that's nowhere near the ceiling for online games and if you are suggesting they would prefer being f2p you are crazy. I'm sure they would have loved to sit at 1mil + subs and never switch over but they can't afford that.  F2p makes money sure but it's not optimal

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #952 on: August 21, 2013, 04:42:39 PM

I like their concepts on CC mitigation except the button mash.
Sjofn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8286

Truckasaurus Hands


Reply #953 on: August 21, 2013, 04:50:57 PM

Their blind isn't hardcore enough.  why so serious?

God Save the Horn Players
Falconeer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11124

a polyamorous pansexual genderqueer born and living in the wrong country


WWW
Reply #954 on: August 21, 2013, 04:55:18 PM

Not to mention that the button mash will have a mash-cap anyway. Meaning, no matter how fast you mash you are gonna be stunned for at least two seconds. Depending on how fast or slow you mash that time can dwindle between two and six seconds.

So basically you are still unable to use your character for x-time, but the mashing distracts you from thinking at how annoying that is. It's ok in PvE, but I already hate it in PvP.

Simond
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6742


Reply #955 on: August 21, 2013, 05:03:40 PM

You mean there's people who aren't going to bind that to some sort of (internal or external) macro ASAP?

"You're really a good person, aren't you? So, there's no path for you to take here. Go home. This isn't a place for someone like you."
Kageru
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4549


Reply #956 on: August 21, 2013, 05:10:59 PM


SWTOR was deeply flawed because too much of their money went into story, so it was worth a sub until you finished the story and then it wasn't. And they couldn't make enough story to keep people subbed long enough to make money-hats. It proves nothing about sub models other than they stuffed up.

I do think the dominant, achievement oriented, game can still probably pull a sub. People who will invest a lot of time in their character having the ultimate shinies, PvP titles and difficult achievements plus a crowd of people playing because their friends are, they dream they'll be a future bad-ass one day. It's the same way a small handful of shooters grab all the attention because they are the big-name games.

GW2 releases content but it's not the type to appeal to these people. Getting a new miniature or a new weapons skin? Serious achiever types aren't interested. It may keep the casuals happy, but they're less likely to be interested in subbing.

Is a man not entitled to the hurf of his durf?
- Simond
Zetor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3269


WWW
Reply #957 on: August 21, 2013, 09:41:11 PM

I like their concepts on CC mitigation except the button mash.
Champions' CC system works the same way, and it was annoying there too. Also, assuming the 'break out button' is completely spammable (no GCD), this will screw high-ping players even more.

UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #958 on: August 21, 2013, 11:33:11 PM

Look I'm just baffled people are saying SWTOR was a good game.

SWOR was okay. It is brought up as a US$300m+ argument that WoW could be beaten if only a company put the time and money in.  I did see you called it underfunded above, but that's not true - it was overfunded.

The problem with subs is that players are no longer willing to wait for a game to be good. Almost every MMO had a terrible launch, and launch is the worst time to play a MMO anyway, but it's at that point in time a lot of players decide if it is worth paying for or not. A sub fee puts a time limit on that decision period too, with a significant proportion of players bailing in the first 30 to 90 days.

If you charge a sub fee only you are competing head-to-head with WoW and that's a fight that's left a string of contenders broken and battered. There's a theory of customer commitment that says if you want to get customers to switch you have to create an offer that is 3x to 9x better than their existing offer, because inertia is a powerful force that keeps customers doing what they've always done. Now, at launch, can someone create a sub-based MMO that is 3x to 9x better than what WoW offers today?

Content-wise: no. But cost-wise / pricing model-wise? Yes, and that at least gets your game onto player HDs.

(Would studios / publishers prefer players paid subs? Yes, absolutely. Which is why hybrid payment models are common.)

Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #959 on: August 22, 2013, 06:25:35 AM

Wow, I can't believe people are bringing up SWTOR as a great game that was worth the money and was successful. GG F13.
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #960 on: August 22, 2013, 07:05:42 AM

I'm sure they would have loved to sit at 1mil + subs and never switch over but they can't afford that.  F2p makes money sure but it's not optimal
You keep comparing to a hypothetical.  I am sure the SOE loves to makes as much money as possible. They make more money subless than they did subful.  That's the reality producers of new games have to deal with. Sinji level of delusions here. Discount all real world examples and pontificate how great things would be based a dream MMO.

"Me am play gods"
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #961 on: August 22, 2013, 07:36:37 AM

Wow, I can't believe people are bringing up SWTOR as a great game that was worth the money and was successful. GG F13.

You're new here, aren't you?   why so serious?

I enjoyed SWTOR.  I just wish that it had held my interest longer.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Dren
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2419


Reply #962 on: August 22, 2013, 07:48:20 AM

Lots of the new crop of games are fun, subjectively. But there are just to many of them to bother with being married to them for years anymore. Why would you, a new one comes out every three months.

You pay a sub because a game merits it.  The number of other choices is irrelevent if those choices are awful.  There are more choices than ever in the MMO market yet people still pay WoW a monthly fee. It's not about other choices, it's about value for your dollar.  The same could be said for hamburgers and sub sandwiches.  Some last while others don't.  Adding more options is less the issue than the perceived value.

For me, the high number of "free" choices pulled me from sub based games just to try it.  Trying an MMO takes weeks realistilcally.  Whether they are bad or good, I was pullled and probably got pulled again once the first try didn't pan out (hell there are probably 2-3 more I want to try once I have the time.)  This is the reason I left WoW a long time ago and never (ok once) went back.  Due to GW2's payment model, I still log in several times a week even through all that.  WoW? No.  I'd love to pay for a good sub game, but the track record since WoW has been terrible.
Dren
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2419


Reply #963 on: August 22, 2013, 07:50:39 AM

Wow, I can't believe people are bringing up SWTOR as a great game that was worth the money and was successful. GG F13.

You're new here, aren't you?   why so serious?

I enjoyed SWTOR.  I just wish that it had held my interest longer.

Same.  I logged in a few times this week and enjoyed another few hours....then lost interest again.  The voice acting actually shocked me since I forgot it and not many other games have it, but it isn't near enough to save it.  Too repetitive.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #964 on: August 22, 2013, 08:47:59 AM

I'm sure they would have loved to sit at 1mil + subs and never switch over but they can't afford that.  F2p makes money sure but it's not optimal
You keep comparing to a hypothetical.  I am sure the SOE loves to makes as much money as possible. They make more money subless than they did subful.  That's the reality producers of new games have to deal with. Sinji level of delusions here. Discount all real world examples and pontificate how great things would be based a dream MMO.

Um, no shit?  I'm not arguing SWTOR isn't making more money as F2P because it's a shit game that can only afford to be F2P.  You seem to be inferring that they would have gone F2P no matter what and that is ludicrous.  They probably would have tried to add a cash shop to nickle and dime motherfuckers all day because it is EA of course but to say they want to give up box sales or subscriptions intentionally not only has no basis in reality but makes no sense.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #965 on: August 22, 2013, 09:34:12 AM

Look if you a producer of a AAA MMO that is going to release in the next couple you have to basic options: follow WoW or GW2.
If you follow WoW, you must hit the ball out of park on your first swing or you lose.
If you follow GW2, you can make a ton of money whether or not your are a homerun or not.

SWTOR,STO,LOTRO,DDO and a bunch others tried the first and settled for the second. Now maybe that's the right way, swing hard for the homerun. But I think they wasted a ton of money and potential retooling to the second and I wouldn't follow that route for a new game.



"Me am play gods"
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #966 on: August 22, 2013, 09:46:51 AM

That's just the same argument people were making about wow when EQ was big. Also, there's no reason a game needs to ever be as big as wow to be wildly successful.  There's a huge difference between 100k subs and 11mil and anywhere in the middle of that is a billion dollar property that any company would love to have.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #967 on: August 22, 2013, 04:06:50 PM

Yeah, Champions is what turned me off on the "pound on the keyboard!" mechanism.
Simond
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6742


Reply #968 on: August 22, 2013, 04:23:19 PM

That's just the same argument people were making about wow when EQ was big. Also, there's no reason a game needs to ever be as big as wow to be wildly successful.  There's a huge difference between 100k subs and 11mil and anywhere in the middle of that is a billion dollar property that any company would love to have.
And yet, nobody has managed it.

"You're really a good person, aren't you? So, there's no path for you to take here. Go home. This isn't a place for someone like you."
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #969 on: August 22, 2013, 04:43:20 PM

So subs are the future because people are willing to pay subs for things, the problem is nobody has made a game worth a sub since wow.  But they are coming, you just wait.  The future i tell you. 

I am the .00000001428%
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #970 on: August 22, 2013, 06:28:31 PM

That's just the same argument people were making about wow when EQ was big.
When EQ was big, the number of real contenders could be counted on one hand. There were dozens of MMOs even then, but most were small MUDs with some graphics, or Asian titles we conveniently lumped into "Lineage1!!/". For common arguments, it was EQ vs AC vs UO. And they all had the same model, all existed by cannabalazing the same hardcore MMO gamer geek subculture of the even-then largely console video game business.

Nowadays there are dozens of real contenders, with as many business models, with such wide appeal you've got fucking grandmothers and US Ambassadors as guild leaders and shit. We keep wanting to compare GW2 to DDO to EQ2 but the comparisons are as forced as the basis of those comparisons. And the companies certainly don't give a shit about the arbitrary equivalencies we draw.

However, this part:
Quote
Also, there's no reason a game needs to ever be as big as wow to be wildly successful.  There's a huge difference between 100k subs and 11mil and anywhere in the middle of that is a billion dollar property that any company would love to have.
... is on the right track.

GW2 "subs" vs WoW "subs" is not a conversation. If you get down to ARPU over time, sure maybe. But we don't get public access to that stuff, and certainly don't get profit per player. So we're left with "GW2 has fewer players because <someone I know> says so", and even that is irrelevant. Because the now 8mm WoW players, of which I think half pay what we consider the normal monthly subs fee monetizes very differently than the we-have-no-idea-how-many GW2 player pay nothing, vs paying a little, vs paying a lot.

Basically we're reduced to "I like game X over Y because of <largely personal reasons>". Which is fine, because let's face it, not like the industry ever listened to us anyway  awesome, for real
Hoax
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8110

l33t kiddie


Reply #971 on: August 22, 2013, 06:32:22 PM

So subs are the future because people are willing to pay subs for things, the problem is nobody has made a game worth a sub since wow.  But they are coming, you just wait.  The future i tell you.

Which is fucking hilariously stupid considering the biggest operations of our time have all failed or are in the process of failure:
-EA/Bioware.
-Whatever Blizz does next (Titan is dead at this point right?)
-SOE
-Bethesda
-SquareEnix

Well guys when Destiny comes out and has subs and doesn't fail that will prove that subs are legit I tell you. If it doesn't its because Destiny made xyz mistakes so that doesn't count even if they go f2p and the game goes on to make a bunch of money and live for a few years as a f2p title.

A nation consists of its laws. A nation does not consist of its situation at a given time. If an individual's morals are situational, then that individual is without morals. If a nation's laws are situational, that nation has no laws, and soon isn't a nation.
-William Gibson
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #972 on: August 22, 2013, 08:45:11 PM

 Facepalm

Just because failed games use subscription models does not mean that subscriptions are a failure.  That is the worst possible logic.

A

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Kageru
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4549


Reply #973 on: August 22, 2013, 09:05:48 PM


The fact that firefall can still take itself seriously is the best evidence of how dire the MMO market is.

Is a man not entitled to the hurf of his durf?
- Simond
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #974 on: August 23, 2013, 05:43:59 AM

Facepalm

Just because failed games use subscription models does not mean that subscriptions are a failure.  That is the worst possible logic.

A

It's a failed model because the F2P model is healthy.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #975 on: August 23, 2013, 07:03:37 AM

Of course F2P is "healthy" it's easy to swindle people out of money when they don't think they are paying much at a time.

You know where most of us probably first tried a F2P model? It was the internet, back in the pay per MB days.  There's a reason most companies no longer use this model, it's because customers would much rather just pay a flat fee than have to worry about every single minute online.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #976 on: August 23, 2013, 07:18:13 AM

Just because failed games use subscription models does not mean that subscriptions are a failure.  That is the worst possible logic.

I tried this a few pages ago.  Give up now and save your sanity.

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #977 on: August 23, 2013, 07:19:50 AM

Of course F2P is "healthy" it's easy to swindle people out of money when they don't think they are paying much at a time.

You know where most of us probably first tried a F2P model? It was the internet, back in the pay per MB days.  There's a reason most companies no longer use this model, it's because customers would much rather just pay a flat fee than have to worry about every single minute online.

That analogy is nonsensical.  What part of the pay per MB internet access was free?  That's a metered pay system, like electricity, water or gas.

Over and out.
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9165


Reply #978 on: August 23, 2013, 08:21:54 AM

Of course F2P is "healthy" it's easy to swindle people out of money when they don't think they are paying much at a time.

You know where most of us probably first tried a F2P model? It was the internet, back in the pay per MB days.  There's a reason most companies no longer use this model, it's because customers would much rather just pay a flat fee than have to worry about every single minute online.

What the fuck are you talking about?

I am the .00000001428%
Typhon
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2493


Reply #979 on: August 23, 2013, 08:42:46 AM

Of course F2P is "healthy" it's easy to swindle people out of money when they don't think they are paying much at a time.
[best to ignore this analogy]

How much of your own bias is driving your argument?  Could a really good game not also be successful adopting a F2P model (see LoL)?

Try this thought experiment - which model is more likely to have existing customers return to play again later?
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 98 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Carbine Studios' "Wildstar"  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC