MMO Subs are a dead model - John Smedley

[Malakili]

Isn't the player limit 4 in D3?   Pretty sure that's going to kill the idea of it taking away any MMO players.   They'll all play it for a month then go back to whatever.

Most MMO players want to solo all the content, or do it with a small group of friends.  It wouldn't compete with EQ or even 2004 WoW, but the MMO Market today is different, and they haven't had a AAA Diablo like game on their radars.  The "social aspect" might be different I'll admit, but I mean, like I already mentioned I don't think the huge swaths of MMO players are really playing their MMO to meet new people or something.

[Numtini]

It's almost impossible to meet new people in WoW because of the cross-server thing. Maybe the changes to it made it a bit different, but one of my frustrations was I had in the past always been able to meet new people and get invites to guilds or raids or PUGs or whatever. The dungeon finder just ended that. Never saw anyone again etc.

[Sky]

You've never actually played a F2P game, have you.

A car with one seat and two gears.

[Kageru]

If most MMO players want to solo all the content then the real question is why so many are still subscribed to MMO's. That need can be much better served by a single player game where there is no competition for content and the story can be built around them. At a guess I'd suspect while they spend a lot of time soloing they hope to be playing multi-player content, maybe at some point, and like the fact that the world is full and evolving. I know playing oblivion can feel sort of lonely compared to an MMO.

A somewhat different issue though.

[Mrbloodworth]

Bragging rights. Having an audience.

[Lantyssa]

"Living in a world".

Even if they goof off and don't take it seriously, having an avatar and being able to walk around and talk to people (or avatar watch) adds something that will be lacking in Diablo 3.  The importance of this should not be underestimated.

[Sky]

"Living in a world".

This.

But no, let's go ahead and 

[Malakili]

Bragging rights. Having an audience.

I think this is the important one, and I think games are learning to add this without a persistent world. See - Achievements in general. Diablo 3 will have a banner system for displaying e-peen.

[Mrbloodworth]

Auto-facebook updates too.

[Threash]

If most MMO players want to solo all the content then the real question is why so many are still subscribed to MMO's. That need can be much better served by a single player game where there is no competition for content and the story can be built around them. At a guess I'd suspect while they spend a lot of time soloing they hope to be playing multi-player content, maybe at some point, and like the fact that the world is full and evolving. I know playing oblivion can feel sort of lonely compared to an MMO.

A somewhat different issue though.

I don't play MMOs for cooperation i play them for competition.  I want people around when i feel like kicking the crap out of them, not while im killing 10 rats.

[sinij]

Auto-facebook updates too.

 

[Ratman_tf]

Facebook is sooo 2010.

[Nija]

That would surprise me. Diablo 3 is likely to have smaller encounters, less continuous addition of content, less content (~20 hours according to a quick google) and fewer persistent world aspects. I don't think it will directly compete with the social and raid game-play that MMO's offer. I'd suspect people will take a break from their MMO, consume the content, and then mess with it casually after that.

Smaller encounters? I guess you mean the size of the bad guy on the screen? I have been on somewhat of a Diablo 3 media blackout, but the last I played Diablo 2 you could turn a corner and encounter dozens and dozens of enemies at once. Since when does that happen in WoW? (I've also ignored WoW for years now as well.)

I really doubt D3 will have less continuous addition of content. It will present it differently - it will probably just use the DLC model like everything else these days.

[Amaron]

Most MMO players want to solo all the content, or do it with a small group of friends. 

People wanting solo content is not the same as them wanting to play solo all the time.   They don't want D3 competing with WoW anyways.   They probably even spent a pretty penny assuring themselves that wouldn't happen.

[Kageru]

Smaller encounters? I guess you mean the size of the bad guy on the screen? I have been on somewhat of a Diablo 3 media blackout, but the last I played Diablo 2 you could turn a corner and encounter dozens and dozens of enemies at once. Since when does that happen in WoW? (I've also ignored WoW for years now as well.)

I really doubt D3 will have less continuous addition of content. It will present it differently - it will probably just use the DLC model like everything else these days.

In the first case I meant number of players,  though some of the WoW encounters do have hundreds of NPC's. There are encounters in wow that do require 25 people acting with a fair degree of synchronisation and shared tactics. To the point where you have to do the encounter many times before you succeed reliably. Whereas diablo encounters tended to be more about 4 people attacking and operating independently.

If Diablo 3 is going to have a live team the size of the WoW one, while being subscription free, that would certainly be a good deal.

[Azazel]

If most MMO players want to solo all the content then the real question is why so many are still subscribed to MMO's. That need can be much better served by a single player game where there is no competition for content and the story can be built around them. At a guess I'd suspect while they spend a lot of time soloing they hope to be playing multi-player content, maybe at some point, and like the fact that the world is full and evolving. I know playing oblivion can feel sort of lonely compared to an MMO.

A somewhat different issue though.

MMOs offer a lot of choice. As a casual non-raider, I'm a fan because of:
1) the persistent and multiple character thing
2) the characters on the same account can have some evel of interaction (twinking)

Depending on my mood and access to other humans:
3) I can solo
4) I can duo with my wife
5) I can play with my wife and our RL friends
6) I can play a PUG dungeon with little effort

And yeah:
7) I like the fact that the world isn't empty - like Oblivion
8) and there's regularly new stuff - particularly if you play on and off and not as a lifestyle.
9) so there's always things I'd like to go back and do. See what old content we can solo or duo, etc.

[DLRiley]

After 8 no one cares, hell 8 is a pain to get for anything organized, but the vast majority of gamers (not mmo players used to EQ1 and UO) don't care about any encounter that requires more than 8 players. That is why WoW can have millions of subscribers but only a handful of them get boners from raiding. Instance encounters to be engaging has to evidently scale on difficulty not the number of players you can throw at it.

I swear this section goes full retarded every four months, cause why are we discussing solo vs group play?

[Amaron]

What are you talking about?  Nobody even brought up the "lol need to have 25 people to have fun" discussion.   We're discussing how D3 can't even meet the same level as WoW 5 man content.

[DLRiley]

What are you talking about?  Nobody even brought up the "lol need to have 25 people to have fun" discussion.   We're discussing how D3 can't even meet the same level as WoW 5 man content.

If I'm following the discussion correctly
"D3 will totally kill mmo's"
"Naw D3 can't kill wow, its not mmo enough, even the encounters aren't epic enough."
"Wait what? the encounters are plenty epic."
"Naw you can't even have more than 5 to a party"

[sinij]

If I'm following the discussion correctly

Not quite...


Smedley - mmo subs are dead
Gamers - only if you are barfing out shitty WoW clones
Smedley - ....
Gamers - lets talk about D3

[DLRiley]

 

[Ratman_tf]

Man, I used to play MMORPGs for the persistent game thing, but WoW cured me of that. There's hardly anything in WoW (or most any MMOGs nowadays) that require more than 5-20 players. That's less than current console FPSes!  Unless you play the auction house, and like it enough to stay for that. 

[Dren]

Back to the discussion of F2P:  I checked out MMORPG.com's list of games and the number of F2P or Item Shop games is enormous.  The list of games that are not released yet but already planning this payment model is only getting bigger.  Looking down through the list it was funny to see older games relisted for future revisions to their pay models (TBD in some cases.)  Also, many of the "For Pay" games generated a chuckle from me because I wouldn't give them a red cent, nor ever felt like I should.  Given the fact that I could probably spend the next 4-6 months trying out all the free games (crappy or not,) I'd be happy giving reviews plus seeing all the "new" things being done in the genre.  I've spent the last 2 weeks alone checking out CoH and CO to determine what I'd like to play for awhile. (Results recorded in the CO thread.)

[sinij]

Dren, with your method of "checking out" F2P titles you are not seeing anything but teaser. In MT title starting experience is _by design_ is nothing like what they have once 'gotcha, they feel invested' threshold passed and milking starts.

you'll get about 20-30 hours worth of enjoyment at least.  At that point, you'll either want more and pay for some things, or just drop it and move on.

You said above about HG F2P in other thread. While HG isn't mmorpg, exact same process (maybe a bit more refined) applies to mmorpgs. You pay "20-30 hours worth of enjoyment" and then massive amounts of suck are pumped in and you are offered to buy your way around suck.

Question is - what you get to see in "20-30 hours worth" in a mmorpg? Well, you get to experience starting zone, get familiar with most in game systems, do some solo questing and a bunch of solo leveling. In a DIKU this is 100% solo 'teaser' content. At this point you only seen starter content and _nothing_  that makes a mmorpg an MMO games.

So, why are you playing mmorpgs again? To solo starting zones? Single Player games do it much better, give it a try.

[DLRiley]

We can ask why are you posting?

30 hours in and I'm still in the starting area? WTF? In any other game I'd be minimaxing my character and on my 6th boss fight. An mmo? Ive upgraded to purple rats, oh but an mmo wants me to pay full price + sub to dick around in noob land. I see major improvement

[UnSub]

Dren, with your method of "checking out" F2P titles you are not seeing anything but teaser. In MT title starting experience is _by design_ is nothing like what they have once 'gotcha, they feel invested' threshold passed and milking starts.

Much like sub-based games, then.

[tgr]

So, why are you playing mmorpgs again? To solo starting zones? Single Player games do it much better, give it a try.

This bit is starting to sound a bit hollow these days.

[Merusk]

Only because there's quickly becoming no such thing as a AAA single player game on a PC.  There's "single player campaigns" that last for miniscule #s of hours and then multiplayer.

[Dren]

Dren, with your method of "checking out" F2P titles you are not seeing anything but teaser. In MT title starting experience is _by design_ is nothing like what they have once 'gotcha, they feel invested' threshold passed and milking starts.

Much like sub-based games, then.

Yeah, I didn't get his point there either.  Instead of paying to get that first teaser, I get it for free?  If you are saying you don't enjoy teaser portions of MMO's, then I'll turn your question back on you...why do you pay/play them? 

I do it to find one I might want to invest in for a few more months.  I guess you are trying to read too much into my statements.  I said you'd get 20-30 hours of play before you decide to play more or drop.  That's all.  Did I also mention it is free?

[Dren]

So, why are you playing mmorpgs again? To solo starting zones? Single Player games do it much better, give it a try.

This bit is starting to sound a bit hollow these days.

I do play non-mmo games.  I pay for them and enjoy them.  Not sure what that has to do with this subject though.  If you like them so much better than MMO's, why come to these threads and fling poo?

[tgr]

So, why are you playing mmorpgs again? To solo starting zones? Single Player games do it much better, give it a try.

This bit is starting to sound a bit hollow these days.

I do play non-mmo games.  I pay for them and enjoy them.  Not sure what that has to do with this subject though.  If you like them so much better than MMO's, why come to these threads and fling poo?

Huh? Why was I quoted?

[sinij]

Only because there's quickly becoming no such thing as a AAA single player game on a PC.  There's "single player campaigns" that last for miniscule #s of hours and then multiplayer.

Dragon Age 2 was just fine. Stop buying or supporting crap games and replay oldies if you have to.

Lowering standards is not an answer. This is what got us into F2P DIKU clone crapfeast in a first place. Remember how it all started? M59, UO... open sandbox, ecologies, communities, risk vs reward, real reputations? Now we have ding-gratz instanced-away DIKU clones where you could play without interacting with anyone, ever...

Kids these days....

[Mrbloodworth]

When do we point out many F2P are not even DIKU.

[Malakili]

Only because there's quickly becoming no such thing as a AAA single player game on a PC.  There's "single player campaigns" that last for miniscule #s of hours and then multiplayer.

Dragon Age 2 was just fine. Stop buying or supporting crap games and replay oldies if you have to.

Lowering standards is not an answer. This is what got us into F2P DIKU clone crapfeast in a first place. Remember how it all started? M59, UO... open sandbox, ecologies, communities, risk vs reward, real reputations? Now we have ding-gratz instanced-away DIKU clones where you could play without interacting with anyone, ever...

Kids these days....

What about the multitude of sub based DIKU clone crapfest, or are you even attempting coherence at this point?

[UnSub]

Remember how it all started? M59, UO... open sandbox, ecologies, communities, risk vs reward, real reputations?

EQ pk'd those games and stole their gold. Then along came WoW.

But this has very little to do with F2P since you could theoretically offer a F2P sandbox. Please stop confusing payment models with game types.