Clone Wars Adventures (SOE) F2P

[Ollie]

Oh poop, Star Wars Bejeweled. There goes the lunch hour.

[Draegan]

I could of sworn I saw a SW Tower Defense game in there.

[Ghambit]

Money Hats!


-edit- The gameplay visuals look just like the Cartoon, that's actually pretty cool!

Fully intended from the show's perspective.  This was all one big masterplan from the get-go.  And I'm not just saying this from speculation, but from leaks and old "wink wink" interviews.   If you connect the dots you suddenly feel like a puppet.

Aannnnnd, I have a little brother who's a FreeRealmer and a Star Wars fanatic (even plays the minis game).  I feel a disturbance in his school transcripts.

[Lantyssa]

I missed the tower defense, but it wouldn't surprise me given there are several in Free Realms.  There is a quick shot of a Jedi class mission progression spanning several planets and space.  A shooting gallery, cameos with the major Clone Wars characters, space combat, speeder bike races, etc.  FR already has housing and pets plus other mini-games, so I expect lots of those.

Now, the question is will it let us pick from a variety of races and will we finally have a Star Wars games where droids are prevalent?  Can we 'wear' races like costumes, or will we be stuck with one from the many potential options?  Given they're hyping it with the show, limiting races to just a handful may not make sense.  I hope.

[Ghambit]

[Mrbloodworth]

I could of sworn I saw a SW Tower Defense game in there.

You did, where you fire the turrets yourself it seems, and in full 3d.

Fully intended from the show's perspective.  This was all one big masterplan from the get-go.  And I'm not just saying this from speculation, but from leaks and old "wink wink" interviews.   If you connect the dots you suddenly feel like a puppet.

The assets for the show have allways looked like they were real time render compatible, i would not even be surprised if most of the show was using real time techniques in the same vein as KAENA: THE PROPHECY

[Sunbury]

I assume this is just Free Realms copied then re-skinned/re-quested?

[HaemishM]

Well... at least it's free. 

[Lantyssa]

I assume this is just Free Realms copied then re-skinned/re-quested?

Presumably it uses the same engine and some of the mechanics that allows.  As for the details, no idea.  Hopefully combat is more involved.

[LK]

It will be interesting to see SWTOR's Design philosophies go toe-to-toe with Clone Wars Adventures and see who comes out on top.

Hint: the launch of this game will not help SWTOR's subscription numbers. Bioware and Sony will be fighting for the same market share and Lucasarts will laugh all the way to the bank, which is probably karma given how abused their properties were with SWG.

[Malakili]

It will be interesting to see SWTOR's Design philosophies go toe-to-toe with Clone Wars Adventures and see who comes out on top.

Hint: the launch of this game will not help SWTOR's subscription numbers. Bioware and Sony will be fighting for the same market share and Lucasarts will laugh all the way to the bank, which is probably karma given how abused their properties were with SWG.

You really think so? I can easily see playing both or neither of these games.  And the super hardcore Star Wars fans will probably just play both.   I don't really seem that as competition to each other at all.

[Cyrrex]

It will be interesting to see SWTOR's Design philosophies go toe-to-toe with Clone Wars Adventures and see who comes out on top.

Hint: the launch of this game will not help SWTOR's subscription numbers. Bioware and Sony will be fighting for the same market share and Lucasarts will laugh all the way to the bank, which is probably karma given how abused their properties were with SWG.

You really think so? I can easily see playing both or neither of these games.  And the super hardcore Star Wars fans will probably just play both.   I don't really seem that as competition to each other at all.

Agreed.  I also think that SWTOR will have a slightly different audience than the traditional MMO, as it will likely pick up old KOTOR players who care little or nothing for the MMO parts and are looking to playing KOTOR 3.  Not saying they'll get exactly what they're looking for, but they'll still try it out.

[schild]

Anyone surprised that Lucas even let SOE touch another Star Wars MMO after SWG?  Im sure the luncheon to convince to license them again involved naked women, alcohol and midgets

If you're going to be funny, at least try to be informed.

[Soln]

this isn't your father's SOE

[Lantyssa]

I'm pretty sure the two games are going for different age and interest demographics.  Any overlap will be because of people that like variety and have a love of all-things Star Wars.

[Fordel]

There's no reason people couldn't play both, it's not like they are competing for the same sub dollars. Really, if they wanted to be REALLY evil, they could make achievements in one game grant bonuses/perks in the other! 

[Moorgard]

FWIW, they made a smart choice in lead designer for this project. Matt Higby had been in charge of special events on EQ2, and came up with all kinds of little mini games and interesting mechanics that were quite popular with players (the rainbow lights you could get treasure from, the goblin lottery, and tons of other fun stuff). He's the perfect choice for a game based around a collection of short, fun games like this.

As for whether CWA will be a cash cow for SOE, it depends on how well they've learned from FreeRealms. Smed has been very public about how they didn't monetize FR properly at launch, costing themselves huge revenue potential. My bet is that they will do a much better job this time around and will have a consideralbe financial success on their hands.

[tazelbain]

>they didn't monetize FR properly
Is this just code for "There was too much 'free' in Free Realms."?

[Mrbloodworth]

I think it means shake them down, then free play.

Instead of free play, then shake down, Or banana suit popups.

[Numtini]

I thought there was too much emphasis on subscription and too little on SOE points.

[Stabs]

I imagine it's considerably more complex.

There's a real art to monetisation. There's very evidently an amount that people are perfectly happy to pay for each type of microtransaction but then no more. We've seen angry player criticism of a number of monetisations: Oblivion's horse barding came out when people weren't ready for $2.99 for a piece of fluff armour. Runes of Magic's $10 basic mount was indignantly protested by a section of the player base although enough of them accepted it to pave the way for WoW's very successful $25 mount. Left for Dead 2 suffered a player boycott. Champions Online charging for respecs got people cross, not because the charge was out of line with other microtransaction charges (cf account transfers) but because the idea of paying for respecs was new and strange.

There are some general rules then it's this - it's safe to copy what people have got used to in other games and even add a little bit. At one point a monthly sub of $15 was new strange and unwelcome. I quite happily played Diablo 2 when Ultima Online started because I didn't see what the $15 was for and didn't particularly want to pay it.

Monetising for children is an especially fine art. The sneakiest method I've heard of was one Jesse Schell mentioned at DICE
http://g4tv.com/videos/44277/dice-2010-design-outside-the-box-presentation/
What the developer is doing is giving children free access but allowing them to accrue store points that can only be spent if they subscribe. The free game is fun enough to keep them playing but there's a growing treasury of store points that they can buy loads of cool things with if they can just persuade Mum to pay a sub.

Not all monetisation has to come from players. Advertisers, lead generation companies and marketing people are very interested in accessing game player bases. This is a particularly sensitive form of monetisation as DDO's offerwall fiasco demonstrated.

It really is an area where the industry is taking rather clumsy baby steps and companies are occasionally provoking outrage as they fumble their way through this new science. It doesn't help that some of the steps are just plain stupid (US Allods players rather objected to paying ten times what Russian Allods players pay - who knew?). As a result developers are proceeding with a great deal of caution and know very well that this caution is causing them to leave money on the table.

However the fact that the industry has moved from a paradigm of everyone knowing how much games cost because they all cost about the same to a paradigm where each game that is produced requires its own monetisation means that we are heading into a period of massive change.

I'm sure that Clone Wars won't have a pricing structure quite like any other game before it, it will be unique as SOE continue to experiment and push. That doesn't necessarily mean giving away less for free - the notional nirvana is a game that is hugely accessible but draws people in to spending Magic: The Gathering level sums to play at the top level. (I spent about £5000 on Magic during the 18 months I played it).

And of course the more the industry chases that nirvana the more pressure will build up in the player base for something cheap and fun that doesn't shake them down every chance it gets.

It's going to be an interesting decade in games marketing.

[Stabs]

Double post sorry.

[Pezzle]

I am not sure the trend is a good thing (nor am I sure your predictions are correct).  The micro transaction phenomenon irritates me.  Give me what I want, not your funny money that will invariably not spend in proper lumps.  Paying a subscription is cut and dry.  Even simply direct payments for content is at least specific.  The entire trend strikes me as an attempt to fly below the 'spend with responsibility' radar.  Shame on those people for being careless, shame on the company that encourages it.  Make a bunch of items really cheap.  Hey, why not buy some?

Target kids?  Really?  Do we need another Kwedit scheme?  What is next?  A pity the trend will continue.  Chalk it up to lack of impulse control I guess.

[Lantyssa]

I much prefer microtrans if the prices are reasonable.  I average less a month for Free Realms with the $5 sub and the occasional store purchase than any other MMO I might sub to.  And it's extra easy since SOE has had a couple of double-your-station-cash periods.

If someone else wants to spend more, that's their own budgetary problem.  As long as it's fluff and the game is designed so it can still be enjoyable without a huge cash outlay, I'm okay with that.

[UnSub]

As best I can tell, F2P titles (in general) are doing fantastically out of the current economic situation. Players still get to play without paying if they want while there are heavy spenders who subsidise a lot of other player costs.

Sub-based pay systems front load the costs - you have to pay up front and then 'earn' your fun back. Fee unlocks give you more control - don't like something, don't pay for it - but being able to pick and choose comes at the price of constantly being presented with things to buy and fewer 'free' updates.

Devs like sub fees because the revenue is easier to work out, but I like F2P in some ways because it forces devs to keep producing content. There are plenty of examples of sub titles resting on their laurels / having large breaks between updates and just letting the sub fees roll in.

[Ollie]

I kind of agree with Lantyssa. It's easy to demonize microtransactions given the lacklustre and sometimes downright horrid implementations thus far. I think players have every right to be sceptical, since in most cases the item shop has added very little perceived value, and in worst cases only served as a thinly-disguised monthly fee and a mandatory cost for surviving a massive grind. But done non-intrusively, they're not so bad.

Also, Stabs might have been wordy, but he is right about one thing: It's early days, and the potential for improvement is massive.

Fee unlocks give you more control - don't like something, don't pay for it - but being able to pick and choose comes at the price of constantly being presented with things to buy and fewer 'free' updates.

It's also a metric for the devs, and one more outlet for players to cast their vote. I like the idea that by purchasing something from the item shop, I'm endorsing specific content. In their small way, my in-game decisions influence the direction the game is heading. Obviously buying a set of fluffy bunny ears doesn't apply, but things will get more interesting once we start seeing more games where we can purchase content modules. Expect to see a lot of blunders there too.

[Grimwell]

I waited a long time to do this...
lolololololololololololololololololololol

That would be me, laughing, at all the folks who put massive hate on SOE over SWG decisions and were certain of a future that did not include SOE and LA playing nice together again.

Sorry, that was kind of rude, but some of the folks who can still get frothing mad about SWG years after the fact and this is humorous since I'm now an outsider.

(edit for context: It's taken me that long to have time to look and find this, sorry for the late laugh)

I'd also like to say that everyone who is complaining about microtransactions being the Devil needs to stop and count the pennies. It's not what folks on a board like this want, but those games imported from Asia are kicking the Western/subscription based MMO's in the pants. On derivative games that only fools would grind right?

They may not be what we want, but we are a minority - one that continues to shrink each and every month. F2P makes good money fast and encourages a light development model. The games come to market faster, profit faster, or die quick before they cost hundreds of millions.

That's business win.

It's not what we want.

[Malakili]

or die quick before they cost hundreds of millions.

This, to my mind, is the biggest plus.  The all in MMO development strategy is going away, its just failed too many times to be worth the risk at this point.

[Stabs]

While historically F2P games have tended to be more cheaply made (which is part of the reason for their poor reputation) there is no reason to believe this will continue to be the case going forward.

Take Turbine. Turbine are converts to the F2P model in all sorts of ways. They believe it makes them more money. They believe it's fairer for their customers (owning, not renting). They believe they are the market leaders in F2P in the West.

If they have a triple A, huge budget MMO in development what business model would you expect them to launch it with? Subs?

Also you only need to spend huge amounts of money if you're trying to do a project like SWTOR. SWTOR emphasises story that is pushed to the players, not the players' individual stories (charcterised by Bartle as "I fell off Weathertop"). It's essentially an interactive film more than a game. Ultima Online wasn't expensive, nor was Asteroids, nor was Civilization.

[UnSub]

Ultima Online wasn't expensive

This I'd like to know.

My personal thoughts on developing a sub model for a MMO goes like this: is my title better than WoW? If no, charge less than $15 a month. If yes, charge $15 a month. Either way, charge for the box to recover development costs and have an item shop since that's just gravy.

F2P just drops the monthly returns in favour of the item shop and selling more boxes / expansions more frequently.

[Stabs]

OK, let me clarify.

Ultima Online was expensive by 1995 standards. Garriott was interviewed recently on Massively's 100th podcast and explained that the publisher only allowed them to do it because it was Ultima, that the idea of a MMO wasn't appealing but cranking out yet another Ultima game was sure money from the people who bought every sequel. He goes on to say that they quickly hit one HUNDRED THOUSAND players (pronounce it like Dr Evil pronounces one MILLION dollars) which gave them a huge profit.

Compare and contrast the announcements by EA that SWTOR needs 2 million subs to break even and has 50 novels worth of content each line professionally voice acted.

By today's standards Ultima Online cost peanuts.

[Mrbloodworth]

I thought UO launched with a Pay by the hour system.

[NiX]

I thought UO launched with a Pay by the hour system.

You sure? I know the beta was paid.

[Sky]

UO was $10/mo. iirc.

[HaemishM]

Yeah, UO was not charging hourly.