This game Need FreePlayers in order to suceed stop to trying to limite them to much !

Stew · 2012-06-29, 08:49 AM

Ok now serious talk ,

This game as been designed to be play in a 64 KM2 open wold sandbox game with 2000 players on it , Absolutly no games as been designed this way EVER even the first planetside was a skirmish compare to that !

So i see to much disrespect and to much people trying to force, or controle, or limites the FREEPLAYERS based, wich in the SOE plans are suposed to be at least 80 % of the overall players based !

We need them, in order to achive the unprecedented scales we need , so i would like the people in here to stop putting up ideas about limiting the Freeplayers, these people have to be please they have to get atached to the game, and then they will probably spend some $$ down the road on it if they really like their experience, and are atached to the game !

These freeplayers arent just free loaders these people are : IN GAME CONTENTS, they are mostly the ones who are going to populated the game!

Anyones here will mind to play skyrims whiout the NPC everywhere on it ?

Anyones here will mind to play planetside 2 whiout the epics numbers in it ? Since the game have been design this way, it could be a catastrophe to have very low numbers in the open continents !

So Freeplayers will make our experience greater and better, so please stop the limitation crappy ideas, this will not help the game, it will ruins it if the player based is ruins, the game is ruins, simple as thats ps2 is a 100 % online pvp game, no instance ,no PVE contents it depend all on Players contents !

So think about it before starting all those treads about, how to limites the free players, they are the most important players, since they will be the vast majority of the players based so they need to be treated well, if not they will never come back !

Please leave the core features out of the payment discussion all the core features like outfit creation , outfit core options , weapons , atachements , VOIP options , Apps options , leadersboards options , in game options everything thats affect the core experience, as the be left out of the payments models !

Thanks !

Soothsayer · 2012-06-29, 08:54 AM

I'm the most important player because I have an unfounded sense of entitlement.

Canaris · 2012-06-29, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by Soothsayer

I'm the most important player because I have an unfounded sense of entitlement.

you have that too? and here I thought I was the only one!

Tooterfish · 2012-06-29, 08:58 AM

Last I checked this will not be pay-to-win. With that said, the whole idea behind the free to play in the first place is, I assume, to accommodate the need for a high player count, which everybody will appreciate. I agree with leaving as much open to "free loaders" as possible. My only concern is that the paid incentives won't be lucrative enough, and I would imagine a lot of people willing to pay feel the same way. This game will only get better if the money rolls in.

Stew · 2012-06-29, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by Tooterfish

Last I checked this will not be pay-to-win. With that said, the whole idea behind the free to play in the first place is, I assume, to accommodate the need for a high player count, which everybody will appreciate. I agree with leaving as much open to "free loaders" as possible. My only concern is that the paid incentives won't be lucrative enough, and I would imagine a lot of people willing to pay feel the same way. This game will only get better if the money rolls in.

Look at the xboxlive avatars thing its a good exemple or look at global agenda skins , Man those are so popular and at 5 to 10 $ a piece its very lucrative for the game to sell those ! On my xbox even if the (( avatar thing )) is pretty silly and worth nothing for in game contents the people seams to be addicted to thats same for playstation home items !

i think with mostly cosmetics and booster if the game is really populated you will see much more people willing to pay than if they have sold the box and have charge a subscibtion model (( planetside )) isnt thats popular its not like COD or battlefield or quake no so much people i know exept few ps1 friends know thats much about this game !

Cosmetics if their is a wide variety of it will provide tons of revenues people like the fashion or the sillyness ( zebra camo ) ( loverator anyones ? ) and some like the bad ass thing like the siny golden pistol :P ill buy this day one

on the long run it will worth it and the game will seel for millions and since they dont pay for the box for the shipments etc.. its 100 % revenue in their pockets !

Flaropri · 2012-06-29, 04:47 PM

Originally Posted by Tooterfish

My only concern is that the paid incentives won't be lucrative enough, and I would imagine a lot of people willing to pay feel the same way. This game will only get better if the money rolls in.

People buy "useless crap"* all the time, so long as the game is good, and marketing isn't completely stupid, it will get money, and it should be enough to make up for initial investments and provide sustained growth (barring outside interference**). You'll get more money (and players) long-term if you don't force people to buy things, whether that is the initial purchase of the game, Outfits, weapons/xp, or anything else.

Think about this as well. All the customized skins, character model modifications, hood ornaments, rims (come on, Sunderer with rims? make it happen!) whatever will advertise themselves constantly to the players simply because there will be people who make that initial plunge and just keep playing. It'll get seen, and people will decide for themselves how cool it is, whether they want it, and whether the price is worth it.

*("Useless Crap" Includes but is not limited to skins, boosts, character transfers, etc.)

**(I think, pending whether or not SOE took out a very crappy loan in order to fund the project, I am more concerned about the overall economy going even worse in the US/EU than I am about the business model for PS2. Of course, that also relies on Marketing establishing reasonable prices for PS2 stuff.)

Stew · 2012-06-29, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by Flaropri

People buy "useless crap"* all the time, so long as the game is good, and marketing isn't completely stupid, it will get money, and it should be enough to make up for initial investments and provide sustained growth (barring outside interference**). You'll get more money (and players) long-term if you don't force people to buy things, whether that is the initial purchase of the game, Outfits, weapons/xp, or anything else.

Think about this as well. All the customized skins, character model modifications, hood ornaments, rims (come on, Sunderer with rims? make it happen!) whatever will advertise themselves constantly to the players simply because there will be people who make that initial plunge and just keep playing. It'll get seen, and people will decide for themselves how cool it is, whether they want it, and whether the price is worth it.

*("Useless Crap" Includes but is not limited to skins, boosts, character transfers, etc.)

**(I think, pending whether or not SOE took out a very crappy loan in order to fund the project, I am more concerned about the overall economy going even worse in the US/EU than I am about the business model for PS2. Of course, that also relies on Marketing establishing reasonable prices for PS2 stuff.)

Yeah look at How ((Avatar)) clothes and goodies are popular on xboxlive even if they are useless these thing are so popular ive seen so many of my friends buying those over and over even if some of them was like 10 $ and more like the star wars skins and other stuff like it lol

they will make much more money thats way and Down the road and will make much more people happy and people whilling to stick to the game if they dont creat a frustration of feeling forced to pay for basic core features and others thing and if free players feel they dont get OWN just because others PAY more !

On the long run, not forcing people to pay will pay off

Originally Posted by Sephirex

Stew reminds me of the old lady that goes into my local supermarket every day and jabbers incoherently to herself while she examines the oranges.

No one's sure how to ask her what she wants, because no one's managed an actual conversation with her without sparking an onslaught of linguistic madness.

Stew this... stew thats... can you avoid personal atack? And try to stay on topic please,iam not the topic if you want to talk about me or about your feeling feel free to create a tread about it, but it will probably get remoove very quickly !

Please back on topic and stop been disrespectfull !

Dagron · 2012-06-29, 05:25 PM

Originally Posted by Stew

can you avoid personal atack?

Maybe personal attacks are the way to go, i haven't made personal attacks against you and you keep ignoring my arguments.

You keep saying that cosmetics will be über popular and will give them rivers of cash without pointing out a single source other than your own assumptions, and for that they should give everything else in the game to everyone for free because it's all "core elements" and charging for them would scare the free players.

Some people on the other hand post interesting if not quite fleshed out compromises and you just ignore them. Someone even posted this video that i reposted, it talks about how the creators of BFH were forced to implement P2W features because cosmetics alone do not support the game (sure things may have changed a little from then to now and maybe more than 1% of the players will buy skins, but i doubt so many people changed in just a few years), and even after that they kept the number of players steady.

You say we need free players to enjoy the game and we say SOE needs money to keep the game free for most people. We listen to you and post responses that adress your points, but you just keep repeating your beliefs without taking anything anyone say in consideration, just like a foam at the mouth religious fanatic.

Flaropri · 2012-06-29, 06:23 PM

Originally Posted by Dagron

You keep saying that cosmetics will be über popular and will give them rivers of cash without a single source other than your own assumptions, and for that they should give everything else in the game to everyone for free because it's all "core elements" and it would scare the free players to charge for them.

Some people on the other hand post interesting if not quite fleshed out compromises and you just ignore them. Some people even posted this video that talks about how the creators of BFH were forced to implement P2W features because cosmetics alone do not support the game (sure things may have changed a little from then to now and maybe more than 1% of the players will buy skins, but i doubt people changed so much in just a few years).

You say we need free players to enjoy the game and we say SOE needs money to keep the game free for most people. We listen to you and post responses that adress your points, but you just keep repeating your beliefs without taking anything anyone say in consideration like a foaming at the mouth religious fanatic.

This is the thing, the thing is...

We don't know the details of the in-game Market. There are several games which have done well with just Customization and Convenience. League of Legends, Heroes of Newerth*, Team Fortress 2*, and some others. There are also games that have embraced Pay-to-Win in a relatively limited, BFH is an example of this, and I'm too lazy to come up with other examples (I think AVA is on a similar model, but I haven't looked into the details recently so I could be wrong).

*(Started as P2P, so not a fully fair comparison.)

The thing is, there are a large number of factors that go into whether or not a game is successful with just C&C and not selling Advantage as the (very interesting) video calls it. Overall popularity, quality of the items sold.

To clarify: From all I've heard, PS2 will sell permanent weapons with SC. However, there are two factors that make this different from "Pay to win." Essentially it is the same as TF2 in this regard.

1. All those weapons are available without SC via in-game resources. Buying the item is similar to a Boost in that it is convenience/shortcut rather than exclusive to SC.

2. Those weapons will be (hopefully) balanced with standard weapons, so they are a play-style/kit choice, rather than a direct superiority advantage. It's also not like you'll necessarily use fewer vehicles either (especially since many vehicles use different resources from weapon unlock resources), just that it takes less time to get the side-grade. Certainly, some combinations might go better in various roles than the standard kit, but that is just optimizing your kit. If I'm flying around in a Scythe as an LA I'm not going to waste a slot on an ejection seat for example. If I buy a replacement for that slot it isn't a real advantage over non-paying players other than saving time.

This model still falls into Convenience and not Power/Advantage in my view, and is something that BFH missed out on (much to its chagrin). BFH also had that problem with VP rentals.

AVA is similar, in that it sells rentals, but you can unlock weapons eventually (It also sells consumables not available with currency though I think, which is why it still falls more into the sell advantage category, but again, haven't checked recently so I could be wrong). AVA also has far less to offer in terms of customization.

Weapons sales are certainly a good potential, but they can and should be able to be unlocked with in-game resources... even if it takes a very long time. Likewise, XP boosts will likely have at least some market, even though obviously they won't get you anything you couldn't get normally.

Skins/models are somewhat iffy in concept. You personally won't see them, except for your vehicles and via 3rd person views which are not conducive to successful shooting at present. Still, Hats are ludicrously popular in TF2, and people still buy skins in Tribes as well. Vehicle skins/models seem like they'll still be very popular regardless because you can and do see that more often, and given precedent I think it is reasonable to think that, given proper Marketing and that the game is in fact good, Customization will be successful.

Transfers/re-certification and other similar services happen, but obviously would be the minority of any F2P business model.

What a lot of threads are doing however, is trying to split the community. "Pay to play like GW2" or "Pay for an Outfit"/"Be subbed to join an outfit" etc. That isn't cool.

So long as the in-game rewards system strikes a good balance between being able to unlock things and the time it takes, there should still be a demand for buying weapons or whatever in-game. Having a wide selection, and expanding it at least as fast as people would theoretically be able to unlock them if they played full-time if not faster... that's good business. And seriously: Hats. And you can unlock hats in TF2 through standard play, but they still sell like hotcakes.

Originally Posted by TheSaltySeagull

Stew however is trying to say that one way is the only way and I do not agree with that. I do not feel this game "needs" free players for it to flourish and have not seen anybody make a convincing argument to explain why it would be impossible to get large numbers of players without it being free. But that is the direction the devs wanna go so I will wait and see how it works.

Fair enough. I was after all just focusing on the initial get-go. I do agree that at least eventually as word/ads spread of how good the game (hopefully) is it isn't required. I do think there is a strong argument that F2P is "required" to get initial numbers on a decent number of servers... but as I said, they could start with fewer servers to get the desired number on the individual servers. It depends on their goal, how many servers and hubs they want to have, with more hubs allowing for greater range (wider coverage around the globe) and more servers allowing for fewer problems for players (by ratio) if 1-2 crash at a given time.

EDIT: I do think though that there are plenty of examples of good games that didn't get their just due. I mean, it isn't so great now, but Home of the Underdogs was a website devoted to such games, and has plenty of examples of pretty good products that didn't do well because of poor Marketing/Advertising/both. It isn't just whether or not the game is fun, especially in an entirely PvP affair that requires bodies and competes with other games of similar mechanics (if not scale).

nteger · 2012-06-29, 09:08 AM

The devs have already stated that subscription users will not have exclusive access to things which free players don't, so I wouldn't worry about it.

Vreki · 2012-06-29, 09:09 AM

Not all FreePlayers are equally desirable.......

Face it, to make money they need to sell something that is worth having, and you can only sell so many skins.
Sidegrades and completely new weapons are stuff that will grab the attention of players.
If you want that kind of extra, you will have to pay.

And no, the most important players are surprisingly not those who generate zero revenue. The game should be fun and balanced for everybody, but money is what keeps it alive.

ETA:

Originally Posted by Stew

on the long run it will worth it and the game will seel for millions and since they dont pay for the box for the shipments etc.. its 100 % revenue in their pockets !

Eh, I should think the box and shipment costs pale when compared to development, advertising and hosting.

Stew · 2012-06-29, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by Vreki

Not all FreePlayers are equally desirable.......

Face it, to make money they need to sell something that is worth having, and you can only sell so many skins.
Sidegrades and completely new weapons are stuff that will grab the attention of players.
If you want that kind of extra, you will have to pay.

And no, the most important players are surprisingly not those who generate zero revenue. The game should be fun and balanced for everybody, but money is what keeps it alive.

ETA:

Eh, I should think the box and shipment costs pale when compared to development, advertising and hosting.

The people who generate a revenue in a F2P model are those who can enjoy the game , No matter how good the game is are you willing to pay to play in empty servers ?

The free players based load the servers and make my experience better than iam willing to spend a lots of $$ because iam enjoying the game the scales etc..

many people will be willing to pay a shit load of money to experience a FULL scales planetside 2 experience not thats much people will be willing to pay big $$ to play in a 200 players continents when it as been designed for 2000

Its like are you going to play battlefield 3 in caspian border or operations firestorm with 6 players in it ? its pretty much the same ratio

Freeplayers make the experience enjoyable for everyones and they are needed because they are the legions we need to enjoy this game !

Tons of people will spend $$ on the game if its fully populated !

Baneblade · 2012-06-29, 09:11 AM

Get back in your box, Stewie.

Top Sgt · 2012-06-29, 09:39 AM

Originally Posted by Baneblade

Get back in your box, Stewie.

^^^^LMAO

ThermalReaper · 2012-06-29, 09:56 AM

I honestly don't get it with stew. It's like the clarity of his sentences is inversely proportional to the amount of words. But yeah, the game is Free to play. Deal with it.