Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

If Trion ever sells out this bad I am goneFollow

#1 Oct 10 2011 at 11:33 AM Rating: Decent
**
526 posts
If I ever see Trion do this I am gone. This might be the straw that broke the camels back for the competition to Rift.

Source: http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/

Quote:
Q: Could I put the Guardian Cub up on the auction house to try to make some gold if I wanted to?

While our goal is to offer players alternative ways to add a Pet Store pet to their collection, we’re ok with it if some players choose to use the Guardian Cub as a safe and secure way to try to acquire a little extra in-game gold without turning to third-party gold-selling services. However, please keep in mind that there's never any guarantee that someone will purchase what you put up for sale in the auction house, or how much they'll pay for it. Also, it’s important to note that we take a firm stance against buying gold from outside sources because in most cases, the gold these companies offer has been stolen from compromised accounts. (You can read more about our stance here.) While some players might be able to acquire some extra gold by putting the Guardian Cub in the auction house, that’s preferable to players contributing to the gold-selling “black market” and account theft.
#2 Oct 10 2011 at 1:10 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
I might be a little cautious about how firmly you maintain that stance. Lots of MMO companies are experimenting with ways to blur the lines between real money and game currency. It really is a case of realizing that they can't beat RMT so the next best option is to make legitimate transactions sponsored by the developers themselves a more attractive (and safe) alternative to buying game currency from illegitimate sources who likely obtained that currency through botting and/or hacking accounts.

EVE has been doing it for some time with their PLEX system and the folks at CCP have done a pretty good job of explaining their stance on not only enabling indirect purchase of game currency with real money, but also the trends on microtransactions as what may drive the economic viability of the industry in the future.

The way we play MMOs is evolving in response to a number of factors, many of which are outside the control of the developers. There's way, way more competition on the market right now than there was 10 years ago, and MMO gamers are fickle. If WoW, Rift, EVE, SWTOR, and GW2 were all F2P, I'd probably alternate between all of them as they were made available because I enjoy Rift, but I've never enjoyed any game so much that I want to play it and it alone for years on end. (I've tried with other MMOs and the burnout was intense.)

I think we need to start letting go of the notion that real money and game currency don't mix. And I would suggest for consideration that the only reason we hold that notion is because in the past, the only people breaking the line between real money and game currency were RMT. They had a dramatic and negative impact on our game experience not because other people were spending real money for game currency, but because of how the RMT acquired the game currency to sell.

EVE has been blurring the lines for some time now, and they have more players because of it. There are a lot of people who wouldn't play EVE at all if they had to pay for a subscription. And there are ways in EVE to be able to generate enough ISK to buy a PLEX (1 month game time) from the market with a few hours in a good Incursion group.
#3 Oct 10 2011 at 1:37 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,702 posts
I don't think it's as big a deal as all that.

Also the fact of the matter is that WoW TCG loot rewards were already sellable in this fashion and somehow that didn't cause the apocalypse.

The MMO market is moving toward a micro-transaction based model. There's virtually no way you can fail to recognize that, whether you think it's a positive or negative change. The point where you need to stand up and say "no more" is what's referred to as the Pay-to-win model, in which the player with the most money to burn is automatically superior to the player who wants to just play the game. THAT'S the model to rage against.
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#4 Oct 10 2011 at 2:05 PM Rating: Decent
**
526 posts
This f2p thing is not as good as it sounds and we never adopted it in the states for a reason. The quality of the game automatically goes to garbage if the Koreans prove anything.

You guys have to think about it. If every single high end game is free why pay for anything? It is called market saturation and the Koreans are a perfect example of what happens.

If ToR, GW2, WoW, Rift all go f2p somehow, then the funding for the games goes down the drain. LoL can pull it off because it is based off a engine that is like 10-12 years old and the only maintenance is probably keeping the power on for the servers.

When you take major mmorpg's and just put them f2p the dev pace has to come to a crawl. The big issue with this is it is flat out blatant legalized gold selling by Blizzard.
#5 Oct 10 2011 at 3:12 PM Rating: Decent
*****
11,576 posts
Puremallace wrote:
This f2p thing is not as good as it sounds and we never adopted it in the states for a reason. The quality of the game automatically goes to garbage if the Koreans prove anything.

You guys have to think about it. If every single high end game is free why pay for anything? It is called market saturation and the Koreans are a perfect example of what happens.

If ToR, GW2, WoW, Rift all go f2p somehow, then the funding for the games goes down the drain. LoL can pull it off because it is based off a engine that is like 10-12 years old and the only maintenance is probably keeping the power on for the servers.

When you take major mmorpg's and just put them f2p the dev pace has to come to a crawl. The big issue with this is it is flat out blatant legalized gold selling by Blizzard.


It has adapted very well in the NA market with games like LotRO. Unfortunately, F2P is currently stigmatized as "that thing devs do to save a struggling game." Nothing could be farther from the truth. Monthly subscriptions are a deterrent. People currently tend to identify with one game because they don't want to pay the sub on more than one. If all games were F2P, people would be free to cycle games as they see fit. If they're bored with one game, they could set it aside, come back to check out patches from time to time or when the mood strikes, and maybe stick around.

I appreciate your point of view, but the trends don't support it. Games that go F2P generally increase their active playerbase and, as was demonstrated by LotRO, increase their revenue relative to subscription-only models. MMO developers are simply adapting to an increasingly competitive market.

Edit to add: GW2 is already confirmed F2P at launch, just like the original GW has always been. There's a reason industry leaders are tossing around the prediction that SWTOR might be the last subscription based AAA MMO.

Edited, Oct 10th 2011 9:12pm by Aurelius
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 23 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (23)