117 replies to this topic

[Rhapsode]

Pax Noctis, on 16 June 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

Yeah, that Riot company sure hasn't made any money at all off that League of Legends game where everything is accessible to everyone except cosmetics.

They are king of the hill right now. Nearly everyone I talked to at E3 this year who is making a F2P game wants to try that business model. It's not easy, but that the model doesn't split your community and create the kind of debate that we are seeing here about WoT.

Edited by Rhapsode, 16 June 2012 - 11:17 AM.

[CCC Dober]

@Rhapsode
If I understand you correctly: it is solely the presence of a subscription model that puts people off?

Hybrid means options/convenience in my opinion. From a pure customer perspective of course.
Hybrid also means that PGI is able to plan ahead.

Plus there are players that want to support them constantly, you know. You wouldn't believe the numbers I have heard my buddies spend on WoT, when they were still in awe and nobody realized what trouble we got ourselves into. Some spent 4 digits and more, it's crazy. And they happen to be MW fans as well ... can you say jackpot?
Admittedly they may seem like a drop in the ocean, but they are there and they care for this game, as does PGI for them. If people want to give you money, then by all means, let them do it at their own pace. Don't try to stop them LOL.

Edited by CCC Dober, 16 June 2012 - 11:21 AM.

[Heldar1]

Beazle, on 16 June 2012 - 11:14 AM, said:

I think a lot of the problems i see expressed about WoT aren't going to be an issue with MWO for the simply reason that there are no "Tiers" in Battletech. You will never face an issue where you out maneuver, out gun, and just plain out play another player only to have your shots "Ding" off the other players heavier armor.

This is because in BT mechs all have access to the same weapons. Lights can mount weapons just as big as Heavies, just not as many of them. There is also no "penetration" mechanic, armor is ablative in nature. If you keep pinging away with the smallest gun you can get, you'll kill him eventually, without having to aim for "weak spots", although shooting them in the back is generally quicker.

I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there isn't a light mech that can mount a Gauss rifle.

[sakkaku]

The only thing I don't like about WoT is the HP system. For instance take a 3601 and SU-85B, they are two tiers apart but one has nearly triple the HP. Both tanks can pen each other do to their weak armor but the 3601 will always win unless the 85b manages to stay hidden long enough to where he isn't hit with two shots.

It wouldn't matter much if the spread of the MM was only 1-2 tiers but it is usually 3-4. So if you are a low tier the only way you can really be useful is scouting until you get blown up instantly or hiding and trying to snipe. This gets extremely annoying around tier 6 when you are facing people with > 200mm effective front armor with a gun that only pens an average of 170 so even sniping may be ineffective.

Now imagine if WoT had equal HP across every tank. People would still want to go up tiers because they gain damage potential and more effective armor. But at the same time you aren't royally screwed if you meet someone a tier higher then you. Lower tiers wouldn't fear being one shot and can be more effective flankers.

TL;DR I think the HP system in WoT is retarded because it forces lower tiers into useless roles and prevents them from being effective flankers.

Lagoth, on 16 June 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there isn't a light mech that can mount a Gauss rifle.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Hollander

[The Fridge]

Rhapsode, on 16 June 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

I work in the F2P industry and specialize in game monetization and microtransactions. I have to say that the I agree and disagree with you.

WoT has a problem with premium tanks but it's not what you think. The issue with premium tanks is primarily how they function and, secondarily, how strong they are. Wargaming set up a system where 1 x $35 (at the release of the first T8 premium tanks) dollar payment would allow a player to immediately participate in the highest level of tank battles and also build directly toward T10 tanks without the same time investment as other players (all free exp). They didn't just sell convenience, they sold dominance and strength.

An old adage in the F2P industry is that you don't sell power, this is generally a good strategy but not always practical or applicable. If you sell power, as happens in WoT, it must be done carefully so as not to split the community and also not damage the life span of your game (either because of a declining player base or declining spending). You don't want some players complaining about "Wallet Warriors" because that means you have divided your community.

WoT could have sold premium tanks without engendering the negative feelings between spenders and non-spenders but they chose not to go that route.

As for the subscription model, I don't like games that try to go with a hybrid, both a subscription service and micro-transactions. Games can be very profitable using only micro-transactions (and without becoming blatantly pay to win in such a way that engenders bitterness from low spenders and non spenders) and can have very long lives. There are some poorly made F2P mmos out there that are in their 6th year of life and still going strong. If those bad games can do it, a well-made, supported, and thoughtfully designed mmo such as MWO should be able to last a very long time with a strong player base and solid revenue.

With MWO, PGI and IGP have an opportunity to create solid and sustainable monetization systems that fund a long and healthy game while not chasing away their community or discouraging players with smaller wallets. The point of a F2P game is that everyone can play. All spenders, big and small, need the free players in the game to ensure the best gaming experience. That gaming experience will keep everyone around and playing and keep PGI and IGP making new content updates and improvements. A subscription model shuts out everyone who won't pay before playing. That's a bad idea in a pvp game.

I have to say, its quite refreshing to hear from someone in the industry rather than just gamer's making assumptions based on the part of the game they see. I'd like to hear what your opinion is regarding the LoL model as i have personal experience with it and i did not play WoT.

HoldinJohnson, on 16 June 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

I agree with all of these points.

I would also like to not see a bias against certain player groups. If you've played WoT long enough, then you'll know that the devs like the Russian players a lot more. Deny it if you must, but it is a fact that the North American players get different specials, sales, bonus codes, and premium vehicles. When the Russian player-base asks for something, the devs quickly include it in the next patch. However (and you'll know about this if you've read the last dev Q&A) , when the North America players ask for a few things, most of which would make the game 10000000X better, the devs say that "We're not doing that" or "We're not planning to include that at this time."

In MWO's case, I don't want to see the devs alienate the European players and others around the world. Not saying that they will, since I have seen the devs make a ton of effort to appease the non-North America players, but it is still possible.

It'll be hard to not alienate the non-NA players until they have servers over seas, which could take a while. I hope you all stick around though so I have more targets for my cannons

[jjuurriijj]

The real catch of WoT was the huge credit curve: it was extremely hard to make a profit with high-tier tanks without a premium account (for a 50% (I think) boost) or having a premium tank to farm credits. Otherwise it would take you ages (literally, like 10000 games) to get credits AND experience needed to progress. League of Legends and Bloodline Champions have done it right. As far as I remember BLC has even the cosmetic stuff attainable with in-game currency, so you can get basically everything (not sure if the company is able to live of such system though...).

[KailKromier]

I would think that if the Devs were going to implement Premium stuff, it would more than likely be premium Clan Tech, like Clan SSRMS or Clan Double heatsinks, things that make a good difference in battle but will not unsettle the games inate gameplay mechanics.

A mech that strolls onto the field with $100 in clan tech might last the whole game...or it might simply get vaporized by a well placed Gauss round from a small mech to the cockpit....Ya dont know.

[Heldar1]

KailKromier, on 16 June 2012 - 11:24 AM, said:

I would think that if the Devs were going to implement Premium stuff, it would more than likely be premium Clan Tech, like Clan SSRMS or Clan Double heatsinks, things that make a good difference in battle but will not unsettle the games inate gameplay mechanics.

A mech that strolls onto the field with $100 in clan tech might last the whole game...or it might simply get vaporized by a well placed Gauss round from a small mech to the cockpit....Ya dont know.

No! That would fall under Pay 2 Win. The devs have said it countless times, there will be no buying of battlefield supremacy, whether it be mech or weapon systems.

[Beazle]

Lagoth, on 16 June 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure there isn't a light mech that can mount a Gauss rifle.

Yes there is.

Hollander comes to mind immediately (I don't think it's in production yet though)

None that are "canon" without level 2 Tech (which we should have access to in 3049)

heck, i can show you a design for a 30 ton that carries an Arrow IV missile artillery system.

Sure you won't find many "canon" designs that mount them in stock configurations, but that's what customization is for right?

[Heldar1]

Beazle, on 16 June 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

Yes there is.

Hollander comes to mind immediately (I don't think it's in production yet though)

None that are "canon" without level 2 Tech (which we should have access to in 3049)

heck, i can show you a design for a 30 ton that carries an Arrow IV missile artillery system.

Sure you won't find many "canon" designs that mount them in stock configurations, but that's what customization is for right?

I appreciate the correction! although now, I've lost a Troll level :/

[Beazle]

Lagoth, on 16 June 2012 - 11:29 AM, said:

I appreciate the correction! although now, I've lost a Troll level :/

Head over to the Davion faction forums and i bet you can get it back with some comments about war mongering and sucky autocannons.

[Rhapsode]

@CCC Dober

A subscription model is a barrier to entry, not an off-putting element. This is not something that's desirable in a pvp game. The more players the better.

F2P business model is neither inconsistent or unpredictable. You can accurately forecast revenue into the future based on game metrics and behaviors. Subscription does not let developers plan ahead any more than F2P.

Also, 4 digits is definitely not common but also not unheard of. I don't want to go into too much detail on how much various people can spend, but some go crazy.

Edited by Rhapsode, 16 June 2012 - 11:38 AM.

[CCC Dober]

You know it's a bad sign when people ask the devs to put in daily exp doubles. WoT devs jumped on that train soon enough. I had buddies who spent hours trying to earn that double only to fail repeatedly thanks to the abominable numbers of lemmings that died without cause or pause. 'Special events' really took the cake with their exp/credit multipliers though. Hordes of lemmings dying repeatedly all the time to "get it over with" really got to me after a while (ain't my cake, sorry). They obviously earned more by means of losing rather than playing to win. It just put the whole idea of the game into question. Few realized that, sadly enough. I can't even blame the players because they believe they are playing the 'system'. It's just too bad when you happen to be not drunk and/or 'special' during that time.

@Rhapsode
Really, it does not let the devs plan ahead?

Well then, humor me. Most WoT premium buddies stocked up on months of premium way ahead of time. It sure was bought with gold, but under the hood they have committed just as much as a subscriber would. They paid up front and the money is spent. So you mean they wouldn't have done that when they could have subscribed and bought gold?

Edited by CCC Dober, 16 June 2012 - 11:54 AM.

[JP Josh]

doesnt any one here read the dev and watch the dev videos :l

guys they said we can get anything in the store without paying a dime its just going to take a long while playing normally before we get it.

jjuurriijj, on 16 June 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

The real catch of WoT was the huge credit curve: it was extremely hard to make a profit with high-tier tanks without a premium account (for a 50% (I think) boost) or having a premium tank to farm credits. Otherwise it would take you ages (literally, like 10000 games) to get credits AND experience needed to progress. League of Legends and Bloodline Champions have done it right. As far as I remember BLC has even the cosmetic stuff attainable with in-game currency, so you can get basically everything (not sure if the company is able to live of such system though...).

thats why i bought the crappy *** type 59 good credit grinder and nearly impentrable turrent and bottom front armer. however any where else a tier four can pen me

[Petrified]

Anyone who has played WoT knows the satisfaction you get when you send a Premium tank to the repair depot.

[CCC Dober]

Yeah, losing money was nigh on impossible. No matter how hard you tried. It was the exact opposite without premium on Tier8+. So much for rewarding the long grind. "No King Tiger for you today, play Hummel and annoy the players or play Pz4 and die like a good german soldier to mighty KV2" xDDD

They were trolling so hard. I even remember that hilarious how-to-kill-T54 thread, which they stickied because everybody and his mother was telling them it was an OP POS (and it really was). They just ignored it and asked you to read the thread first ... wow >.>

Edited by CCC Dober, 16 June 2012 - 12:21 PM.

[-Anubis-]

Unlike a simple subscription model, when a player "buys" one of these tanks they feel a certain sense of entitlement. "I paid good money for this, so I better get my monies worth Devs". And the "free" players feel like they are merely there to provide target practice for the players who paid for their tanks.

To be honest with you if you in a lower tier then yes you at a disadvantage but if you matching the tier of the tank they bought you can defeat it just as well as they can, and if your always getting destroyed by them then you probrably just not that good at the game, The main point of premiums is increased money making there more or less on par with there teir.

[Furniture]

Phaid Knott, on 16 June 2012 - 10:04 AM, said:

From what I've seen the Devs said they have no plans to go down this route, but then again the Devs of WoT made similar statements while the game was in Beta.

I'm not a supporter of WoT, but I was in their closed beta, and Premium Tanks have been in that game since those days. In other words, they were always in. I remember the Valentine being the premium tank that I had during closed beta (they were free during beta). But they sucked and were pretty much just money makers. Their community didn't change because of it, since it always there. Your argument is very compelling, but I just wanted to point that out. Otherwise, I agree with you. I don't like WoT's system very much.

[Kasseopea]

The lesson i learned from WoT was "Dont F*ck with a guy twice your size" - it also quite helpful in RL.

Once, i CB-tested Battleforge. Ofc we also had an NDA. For those who dont know - Battleforge is/was a mix between a TCG and an RTS. It was a quite awesome mix, since you could summon your deck of 20 cards on the field and than fight with them like in a common 3D-strategy. Unlike a common RTS though, you had hundrets of units, buildings and spells and had to choose 20, so it made each deck unique and each match an experience. However, you got only a very small amount of basic cards at the beginning and the only way to get new cards (unless wanted to spend a year farming gold), was to buy them for cash.

Well, fair enough would one say, but there was one thing, that determined its fall: In any magazines or TV-Shows they told people, that you can actually win cards ingame just by playing. The beta-testers couldnt say that it was a lie due to NDA and so people bought the retail-version for about 50$ just to realize they wont be able to enjoy the game for longer than some hours and then get stuck.

Everyone was p1ssed (Lv1)

The made it then f2p, though those who began to play it for free got even less cards which were barely enough for a funtioning deck. The retail buyers were enrage, since they paid for basically the same.

Everyone was really p1ssed (Lv2)

This led to players, begging for ingame cash from other players which earned the game in germany the name "Bettelforge" (Betteln = begging -> Begging-forge).

Everyone p1ssed to the max (Lv3)

Game Over. Servers down. A similar thing happend to Hellgate. Those were 2 absolutely divine games, ruined by retarded management. And those were 2 games too much, i hope it wont happen ever again, though it doubt it wont.

Edited by Kasseopea, 16 June 2012 - 12:35 PM.

[Argon3]

A lot of things are covered well here
The premium tanks allow you to grind more effectively
But they do not give an advantage in Clan Wars
In the beginning they were an ok alternative but a Successful clan does not use them in clan wars
Most of the whining in WoT comes from those that want a premium but cannot afford them
They get out gunned and tiered by premium tanks because they have not ground out to better tiers
They want to be given the better tanks
And you know what
If they are they will still do things that will get them killed first
Here due to the nature of the armor
All is in a sort pre-balanced
Now a Premium Atlas will waste you if you go head to head with it in a light mech just like a regular one
I have seen other games that at first people would run out and get killed because they were STUPID
A premium tank/mech will not help that (think of "scout" tanks )
Even if you tell them, hey doing that will kill you
it still happens.....
Till they learn
Some never learn

Those are the ones you hope are on the other team
I have just a few games in WoT (and all the T10 tanks plus a few more)
I have seen the Smart ones run out die and the few left pillage the rest of the other team even when down 3-4 tanks
Because they are better players with tanks and tactics
Of course if the other team is the same way the left tanks get some kills before being pillage themselves

Will I pay to help the grind
Yes

Will I pay for a few premium mechs
YES

Will I be unhappy if they tweak my mechs after I buy them
Yes but I have seen the tank tweaks in WoT and I adapt and still win

I play all tiers in WoT
Because if you can do well in low tiers where almost every other tank can kill you, you know how to play the GAME.
Idiots will ruin any game. People who play the game well do well no matter what.


Edit: I have check they whiner stats and normally they do not have a good win lose ratio

Edited by Argon3, 16 June 2012 - 12:44 PM.