I hope it's more like EQ1 and less like EQ2. I especially hope it's not like WoW.
Aren't all MMOs sandboxes?
Well, I'm not sure SoE has given any indication they know how to do F2P right is my only concern.
But, everything else about this project has sounded right where I want it, so I'm willing to give a little.
Besides, after WoW, I'll never presume that a P2P community is superior to anything ever again.
I'll get a keyboard for chatting for FF14 on ps4. Hope this also comes to ps4. There's a huge need for sandbox MMO's. Themeparks (mostly wow-clones) have been flooding the market.
Would you mind explaining a little further? I can understand that in the context of Eve, but I'm having difficulties imagining that in a traditional (fantasy) MMORPG setting.No, there's two sub-genres. One is Themepark where developer makes very specific content that people play through and are generally linear. Sandboxes are completely non-linear in their design where it's mostly player generated content and emergent gameplay where you never know what you'll login to.
100pct sure its coming to PS4 as well:
All I know is there better be a bard class and it better be as awesome as it was in EQ1.
Bards were rigged. They could pull entire high level zones and level to 50 within a week. They also got dual wield, track, levitate, speed buff better than SoW, etc. fuck 'em >.>All I know is there better be a bard class and it better be as awesome as it was in EQ1.
I'm not sure I've got much reason to put faith in this site's opinions, but I'm not going to lie, this has me intrigued. I really hope this delivers.
EQ2 was ok in some respects, but it was fundamentally a major disappointment. A fresh sandbox would be just what is needed in the genre right now, and I believe they stated some time ago that we can expect PS4 releases of all their forthcoming MMO projects.
how ugly are the character models gonna be i wonder
Nah. It's either themepark or sandbox.Aren't all MMOs sandboxes?
Would you mind explaining a little further? I can understand that in the context of Eve, but I'm having difficulties imagining that in a traditional (fantasy) MMORPG setting.
That sounds potentially exciting though, because I really disliked the guided approach most MMOs follow these days.
How about the sub model in general is a barrier for people to play in general, and those that are interested in your game will be much more likely to play regardless of quality?It does dictate its quality in my eyes, even if people think there are "good enough" examples of f2p out there not a single one of them has been up to an adequate level for my standards.
You previously brought up that all these games are going f2p from sub for a reason, and that reason is that all of them have been bad enough to not compel people to pay the monthly sub for them which just means the games need to be better. I will never condone praying on this weird consumer mindset that has developed in recent years that just because you don't initially have to pay a fee to play that you are getting a good deal.
You either end up paying far more money for the same amount of content as you would have been getting with a sub or you end up playing a bare bones version of a game where your time would be better spent on some other game.
I don't like the philosophy behind it, I don't like a game being developed with pinching every bit of money out of the consumer as possible with the same kinds of content that would otherwise be in the game in mind and I don't like the lack of support that ends up cropping up further down the line during the games lifespan in most cases.
Having to fight for your player bases money every month only leads to a better overall product and there hasn't been a game so far that has made me feel otherwise.
Aren't all MMOs sandboxes?
Sandbox MMOs are player driven in that players have huge effects on the world (building cities, major economic shifts, land control, etc).
Themepark MMOs are basically like open world games where you run into various dungeons and quests but don't change much outside of what you're allowed to via pre-scripting.
It does dictate its quality in my eyes, even if people think there are "good enough" examples of f2p out there not a single one of them has been up to an adequate level for my standards.
You previously brought up that all these games are going f2p from sub for a reason, and that reason is that all of them have been bad enough to not compel people to pay the monthly sub for them which just means the games need to be better. I will never condone praying on this weird consumer mindset that has developed in recent years that just because you don't initially have to pay a fee to play that you are getting a good deal.
You either end up paying far more money for the same amount of content as you would have been getting with a sub or you end up playing a bare bones version of a game where your time would be better spent on some other game.
I don't like the philosophy behind it, I don't like a game being developed with pinching every bit of money out of the consumer as possible with the same kinds of content that would otherwise be in the game in mind and I don't like the lack of support that ends up cropping up further down the line during the games lifespan in most cases.
Having to fight for your player bases money every month only leads to a better overall product and there hasn't been a game so far that has made me feel otherwise.
How about the sub model in general is a barrier for people to play in general, and those that are interested in your game will be much more likely to play regardless of quality?
Nah. It's either themepark or sandbox.
Sandbox is kind of a niche thing, and I think the "average joe" gamer (the masses who adds to the pop numbers) won't like it much without quests/waypoints telling them what to do.
To be honest I've been around the block when it comes to MMOs and WoW really does have the worst community I've seen. Every other MMO I go to the community is very nice and helpful with the occasional asshole.
In regards to the game I have very high hopes as we need a damn sandbox that isn't in space. If I can build a house somewhere out in the woods I'll be sold. By the way the unveiling is on Aug 1st at SOE Live. Here's a untextured screen of a model for EQN:
I know, but I think if you start adding themepark fluff to your sandbox world, then you'll have gamers cry out lack of "quests" content and quality, and it'll force the devs to shift out and possibly change their initial design.Games can have both though. Star Wars Galaxies was one of the biggest sandboxes ever for MMO's yet it had a bunch of themepark zones which were even called that. You would go to them to play out your typical linear style questing system with story, but it didn't dominate the game or was the main gameplay, it was just something a person could do.
F2P for most games gives you a large profit spike in the short term at the cost of customer loyalty and lots of long term profit. There are some outliers that end up maintaining the profit spike for long term but they are as rare as WoW is to sub based games.
Not sure what you are talking about, since almost every f2p game that's come out is still operating, producing content, and in many cases still hiring staff. Lot of folks make comments like this yet there is not proof to it, f2p games dont make a ton of money and suddenly die, many have been going for years now with it being rare any even shut down.
And again, WoW was special, it's silly to compare every MMO to it as if that was the only bar for success. We have seen how games with far fewer player bases can have longevity and be profitable.
As someone that spent almost 2 full years of in game elapsed time played on Everquest 1, the next EQ being f2p kills off every bit of hype I have had for the game since it was first revealed.
That's 3 series I hold in super high regard that f2p has completely ruined in sequels now if that ends up being true, talk about a let down. PSO2 and PS2 were bad enough.
I've had that impression, but I've never stayed in any MMO more than about 3 months except for EQ1, FFXI, and WoW.
Shadowbane at launch was pretty ugly, but I think I've blocked out most of the specifics.
Not sure what you are talking about, since almost every f2p game that's come out is still operating, producing content, and in many cases still hiring staff. Lot of folks make comments like this yet there is not proof to it, f2p games dont make a ton of money and suddenly die, many have been going for years now with it being rare any even shut down.
And again, WoW was special, it's silly to compare every MMO to it as if that was the only bar for success. We have seen how games with far fewer player bases can have longevity and be profitable.
I am fully aware MMO's can operate on small player bases for long periods of time. The original EQ was still getting exspansions as a sub game years and years after launch, it didn't go f2p until fairly recently.
My point is that it isn't worth sacrificing quality and long term profits for a short term boost just to later come back down to earth and have lost your most loyal fans in the process.
I'm not talking about them dieing off, I am talking about that initial giant spike in profits slowly evening back out closer to the level of profits they had when they were sub based.
I am fully aware MMO's can operate on small player bases for long periods of time. The original EQ was still getting exspansions as a sub game years and years after launch, it didn't go f2p until fairly recently.
Even FFXI which has a miniscule playerbase compared to WoW is still profitable enough to make SE money as a sub based MMO to this date, which is why it recently received a full exspansion.
My point is that it isn't worth sacrificing quality and long term profits for a short term boost just to later come back down to earth and have lost your most loyal fans in the process.
The fact that SoE has turned all of their games into F2P and are now strictly a F2P company should tell you that you are wrong.
As far as F2P games being lesser quality, that is just absurd, SoE is not some small ass company, and EQ is the face of their franchise. Do you really think it's going to be cheaply made, considering Smed wants these games to last 15+ years?
God damn at the clutter on that desk.
Then MMO's aren't really the genre they should be looking into. Also there should be no excuse to play a game regardless of quality even if its free. Time is a more valuable resource then money is.
If having a sub makes it so some people find another game to play, and gives all the people that decide to pay the sub fee a far better experience to the point they decide to stick around for 5-10 years, then I would take that any day as a consumer or as a developer.
F2P for most games gives you a large profit spike in the short term at the cost of customer loyalty and lots of long term profit. There are some outliers that end up maintaining the profit spike for long term but they are as rare as WoW is to sub based games.
Sandbox, large, fantasy?
Always wanted Fantasy EVE Online... perhaps this will be it? (EDIT or planetbound scifi sandbox MMO is fine as well)
Everquest online adventures was my videogame crack back in the day. If they bring this new one to ps4 too ill be there day fucking one.
I sincerely hope this is what it is. EQ world + EVE online sandbox + active combat would just be absolutely mindblowing. That type of sandbox gameplay, if done right, will make for a very solid subscriber base. Even now, EVE's subscriber base is still growing which is seriously impressive for such a niche title.
Well, as someone who felt the same as you for a long time, I've basically come to the conclusion that the P2P business model simply won't work for the lifetime of MMOs anymore unless they are the top-dog for the duration, the one game everyone associates with the genre, the game all the cool kids play while making fun of every other game. Post-TOR, gone are the pipe dreams of venture capitalists throwing money at subscription MMOs, confident they have just bought their ticket to the land of milk and honey.
Of course, new projects need to both have noticeably higher quality than their competitors and a unique hook, but the market is so saturated right now, and every game so dependent on a large playerbase to be functional, that the actual products themselves are virtually worthless.
You are exactly right that time is more valuable than money. The competition in the MMO market isn't just for people's money, it's for their time, and there's simply too much out there to expect to compete for people's time if you're paywalling everyone even remotely interested. F2P means thousands of people you wouldn't have otherwise will visit your game, even if it's only twice a month. The influx of warm bodies gives the appearance of popularity and sustainability necessary to keep people believing the game is healthy. I'm guessing the market has proven that someone who plays twice a month is just as likely to buy a hat for $1 as someone who plays 20 hours a week.
Maybe one day there will be so many MMO fans around that every game will have access to a deep enough dedicated population to make every game a P2P project focused solely on keeping its dedicated fans happy with no concern about growth, but I'm not sure that's realistic.
My most anticipated game. EverQuest is one of my favorite games of all time.
Is this F2P or no?
Hope so.
Personally I hope for a GW2 model. Is that considered FTP? its not really free.