[Pucky-Chan :3]

Tashigi, on Jan 29, 2013 - 1:58 PM, said:

I believe the chances of P2P + Item shop are the highest as well, but it's something that needs to be taken into consideration. The market for games in general, is changing. Specially in the MMO field.
As for it not being fair, take this for instance: Japan pays $30/Month on some subscription based games (See: Aion/TERA/FFXI(Previously) and some others), while we and the rest of the world pays $9-16 USD.
Different models for different markets.

I see hat they are focusing on the playerbase the most.
It isn't important what payment kr bns has. They already stated that they want to make it better for the west style, and i see B2P with. 20-30 as price the most apealling.

[Tashigi]

Pretty sure if they go with B2P, it'll be the same price as GW2 ($60 USD).

[Mickey]

I'm really starting to not want to play this game if they're just going to leave us with questions.

This post has been edited by Stacked Ares: Jan 29, 2013 - 3:58 PM

[Sake]

Stacked Ares, on Jan 29, 2013 - 2:40 PM, said:

I'm really starting to not want to play this game if they're just going to leave us with answers.

you mean questions right?

[Pucky-Chan :3]

Tashigi, on Jan 29, 2013 - 2:28 PM, said:

Pretty sure if they go with B2P, it'll be the same price as GW2 ($60 USD).

Wasn't Tera B2P 30$ on steam?

[Tashigi]

TERA initially launched with a digital sale price tag of $49 USD for standard and $59 USD for digital collector's edition.
Keep in mind TERA NA was P2P initially. Only in Feb, 2013, will it be F2P.

TERA is another example of market change and it symbolizes something that was noted before: Developers focusing more on the item shop than on content.
Content in TERA is very limited/washed and bland. It all revolves around a broken enchanting system as well, plus many other things that added to the formula that led to it's ultimate demice and model convertion.

[Pucky-Chan :3]

Tashigi, on Jan 29, 2013 - 3:33 PM, said:

TERA initially launched with a digital sale price tag of $49 USD for standard and $59 USD for digital collector's edition.
Keep in mind TERA NA was P2P initially. Only in Feb, 2013, will it be F2P.

TERA is another example of market change and it symbolizes something that was noted before: Developers focusing more on the item shop than on content.
Content in TERA is very limited/washed and bland. It all revolves around a broken enchanting system as well, plus many other things that added to the formula that led to it's ultimate demice and model convertion.

Well, i am i think the youngest player on the forum, so i don't really know these types of games. But, bns can do the same thing, but as i said without relying on the.item shop that much. I think that B2P would give more profit even if don't seems so.

This post has been edited by Pucky-Chan :3: Jan 29, 2013 - 3:46 PM

[Awake.]

Tashigi, on Jan 29, 2013 - 1:58 PM, said:

I believe the chances of P2P + Item shop are the highest as well, but it's something that needs to be taken into consideration. The market for games in general, is changing. Specially in the MMO field.
As for it not being fair, take this for instance: Japan pays $30/Month on some subscription based games (See: Aion/TERA/FFXI(Previously) and some others), while we and the rest of the world pays $9-16 USD.
Different models for different markets.

I don't think the market is changing for MMO's at all tbh. Just because GW2 used a B2P model people have gotten all up in arms about subscription fees being a thing of the past, and also how lot's of MMO's are F2P now. But the thing is, the majority of all high production mmorpg's are still all developed as P2P games. Practically every MMO was at some point, even the F2P ones.

I'm not saying that P2P is the only way to go for mmorpg's, but I honestly don't think you will be seeing a new wave of games coming out that are as high quality as Blade and Soul or other games that are suddenly all B2P or F2P. In the hands of a good development team and a good game, P2P + cash shop just makes the most money hands down when you have a large playerbase. If that wasn't the case, then games like WoW would have changed their model already, and Blade and Soul probably would have never been P2P cash shop in the first place in Asia.

[Tashigi]

The reason games like WOW haven't changed their subscription base, is because they already managed to scoop in a large player base and they have successfully maintained said player base "content/happy" through updates.
That group has slowly, but surely moved on and will continue to. When Blizzard realizes that they can bring them back or bait them back through a different payment method, they'll do it for sure.

I am not disagreeing with you. P2P + item shop does make a tremendous amount of money for these companies.
But with quality games like GW2, Firefall and some others, this is surely going to sting companies like Blizzard.
NCSOFT in the west, doesn't have the power over gamers that Blizzard does. So they can't play on the same field. Naturally, NCSOFT will be forced to play the game differently.
This combination of events and already established models/communities is the reason why I say that things are changing.

Once upon a time, companies determined what "gamers" would get.
The present and future says it's the other way around. Developers and "gamers" are telling companies what's up.

This post has been edited by Tashigi: Jan 29, 2013 - 9:20 PM

[BLöDSKääL]

Yeah NCWest need to make it with this game and Wildstar, or they risk their foothold in NA, as fragile as it is

[Phangs]

Vile Samael, on Jan 28, 2013 - 9:30 PM, said:

Well, you're not getting the second one, as has been said already. There's a cash shop in KR, and there's no way they're dropping it.

Yeah someone told me that recently, i was really surprised (it's been a long time since i last played). Good thing is that they only sell a few outfits.

Anyway, guess P2P all the way.

[BLöDSKääL]

Its the only way to go with blade and soul, unless the game fails to meet the expectations put for it, like tera did.

[hpnotiQ]

Mythicalbrit, on Jan 27, 2013 - 4:45 PM, said:

Wait based upon what u said u hate Pay to win, so if its F2P and not pay to win doesnt that make it better? Your argument is so biased and skewered, I cant even make a proper counter point against you.

Do you seriously think that a game that is F2P is not going to be P2W?? then you've not played F2P games. And based on other F2P games i've played that are P2W, i thought that was clear.


The thing is, if they do it B2P they could have like 10 new costumes each month and people that feel like they can afford it can buy it. or mounts, 2 new each month?, as long as it's not P2W items. I think they would make a ton of money each month. I can easily pay a few dollars for an awsome costume or a mount.

This post has been edited by hpnotiQ: Jan 30, 2013 - 9:02 PM

[BLöDSKääL]

yeah but if you have P2P and cashshop, there will be a steady income that will make it so the servers have regular maintenance and updates, and then extras from the cash shop that will make the developers more inspired to keep on thinking of stuff. B2P games like GW2 cant be compared to BNS because despite me really enjoying Gw2, it really is not in the same calibre. WHich is why it cant be F2P or B2P. P2P is the only way for Bns to go and grow like wow did, and potentially become big.

[Mythicalbrit]

hpnotiQ, on Jan 30, 2013 - 8:53 PM, said:

Do you seriously think that a game that is F2P is not going to be P2W?? then you've not played F2P games. And based on other F2P games i've played that are P2W, i thought that was clear.


The thing is, if they do it B2P they could have like 10 new costumes each month and people that feel like they can afford it can buy it. or mounts, 2 new each month?, as long as it's not P2W items. I think they would make a ton of money each month. I can easily pay a few dollars for an awsome costume or a mount.

I have played pretty much every F2P mmo so going to have to say no your wrong on that point. F2P=/=P2W the 2 are mutually exclusive (while being closely intertwined one DOES NOT = the other) P2W can happen just as easily in a P2P game as long as a cash shop exists it CAN happen, P2W is not a result of F2P it is a result of a cash shop it is more prevalent within F2P games because they have no other income directive but it does not mean that a P2P/B2P game with a cash shop will not be P2W all that decides that is the mercy of the Devs and the Weight/lack thereof of their/the publishers wallets.

[BLöDSKääL]

theoretically you are correct, practically, your Standing is flawed. Nearly every single F2P MMo, with exclusion of Tera, is P2W, such as Allods Online being the most obvious case of this

[Vile Samael]

[BrandX]

With a subscription model that would be 50cents a day, I dont see the problem with P2P. 50 cents a day is not a lot.

[Vile Samael]

BrandX, on Jan 31, 2013 - 1:45 AM, said:

With a subscription model that would be 50cents a day, I dont see the problem with P2P. 50 cents a day is not a lot.

My biggest problem with P2P is that I don't like the feeling of obligation that comes with it. I like being able to hop between my games as I want, and if I'm paying like $15 a month or whatever I'll always feel like I have to play it, or I'm not getting my money's worth. God forbid if I go on a spree with another game and just squander a bunch of money. I wanna pay when I want and when I feel it's worth it. Every month? Not with how I play games. Nope. If I just paid while I felt I'd still get my money's worth, I'd play for a month or two, maybe three tops. Maybe come back when there's a big patch that really intrigues me and I feel is worth paying for, I dunno. But otherwise? They're not getting money. They'd also get LESS money out of me in the long run because I spend money on games in bursts. So, I mean, imagine how many players that are exactly like me when it comes to this that they'd be losing, compared to just those that are hardcore P2P elitists that can't even play B2P because they're too convinced everything but P2P is shit.

B2P will get them the largest audience for the longest amount of time. They'll also get way more money from burst spenders like me. I also personally feel that BnS isn't really worth a subscription. Yeah, it's great, sure but... it's not really all that innovative, to be honest. It's not a special kind of different that's really grabby for a large amount of people. B2P and a CS? Hell yeah I'll pay for that.

'Course this'll just be blown off as "IT'S JUST YOUR OPINION YOUR ONLY PROBLEMS ARE OPINIONS" even though I've provided plenty of facts in the past regarding payment methods but yeah

This post has been edited by Vile Samael: Jan 31, 2013 - 2:20 AM

[Famfrit]

Vile Samael, on Jan 31, 2013 - 2:19 AM, said:

My biggest problem with P2P is that I don't like the feeling of obligation that comes with it. I like being able to hop between my games as I want, and if I'm paying like $15 a month or whatever I'll always feel like I have to play it, or I'm not getting my money's worth. God forbid if I go on a spree with another game and just squander a bunch of money. I wanna pay when I want and when I feel it's worth it. Every month? Not with how I play games. Nope. If I just paid while I felt I'd still get my money's worth, I'd play for a month or two, maybe three tops. Maybe come back when there's a big patch that really intrigues me and I feel is worth paying for, I dunno. But otherwise? They're not getting money. They'd also get LESS money out of me in the long run because I spend money on games in bursts. So, I mean, imagine how many players that are exactly like me when it comes to this that they'd be losing, compared to just those that are hardcore P2P elitists that can't even play B2P because they're too convinced everything but P2P is shit.

B2P will get them the largest audience for the longest amount of time. They'll also get way more money from burst spenders like me. I also personally feel that BnS isn't really worth a subscription. Yeah, it's great, sure but... it's not really all that innovative, to be honest. It's not a special kind of different that's really grabby for a large amount of people. B2P and a CS? Hell yeah I'll pay for that.

'Course this'll just be blown off as "IT'S JUST YOUR OPINION YOUR ONLY PROBLEMS ARE OPINIONS" even though I've provided plenty of facts in the past regarding payment methods but yeah

If they made it so you paid $15 bucks, but as you played your time got used up, instead of paying for a whole month each time. I think that would be fairly acceptable :/