Silent Hunter Online - Page 18

drEaPer · 05-10-12, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The idea seems to be that you get people to play by offering the incomplete, unfinishable game to the public in the sure knowledge that a certain number will become addicted and pay the price just so they can keep playing.

Yep, and before it just had a different naming: Demo, Trial, Shareware with restricted access to content and functions.

Unlike World of Warcraft, Eve Online etc. you do not have to pay 60 bucks after a 14day trial and transfer 15 bucks a month to continue playing.

That is really bad, I see...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Sounds like a scam to me. No, more like a drug dealer.

You can get alcohol if you want it. It is your decision if you consume it.

Your logic: Games should not be fun, when there is paycontent in it, as fun games can be addictive.
Ban World of Warcraft.
Ban arcade game halls.
Ban poker.
Ban las vegas. Its the biggest drug dealer in the world.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

A long time ago there was a cartoon strip called The Wizard Of Id. One of the characters once paraphrased Abraham Lincoln, saying "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and that's enough for a good lawyer to make a living."

Blizzard fools over 10 Mio people. They are probably all braindead zombies. I was one of them. And I enjoyed my zombie time. It was a good game, until I got bored and quit. Maybe I am just too drug resistent?

Playing a subscription based game for half a year:

Initial cost: ~60 $, Subscription cost: 15x6 = 90$
-> 150 $

Invest 150 $ in the core unlocks of a western (non asian grinder) F2P and you will have probably unlocked all of the permanent important stuff that you need to fully enjoy the game and even retain some money for those "consumable" things like potions or XP boosts.

Conclusion: You are a doomsayer.

Julhelm · 05-10-12, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hinrich Schwab

Given your attitude, consumers should not have complained over the problems surrounding Ford Pintos either. :nope

Because when you buy a car you don't sign a damn license agreement that releases the manufacturer of any responsibility if the car is faulty. Seriously, can you try to strawman any harder?

Hinrich Schwab · 05-10-12, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julhelm

Seriously, can you try to strawman any harder?

What do you think you have been doing the entire time your weasel-worded argument has supported the gaming companies, hypocrite?

I rest my case.

Julhelm · 05-10-12, 02:07 PM

Whatever, man. It's obvious that you have your beliefs firmly entrenched and are unwilling to look at things with an open mind, so the discussion is moot.

Jimbuna · 05-10-12, 03:37 PM

Let us not resort to name calling please.....disagreeing and discussing each others differences is fine but name calling and insults will not be tolerated.

I thank every contributor in advance for their cooperation.

JohnnyMacintosh · 05-10-12, 11:23 PM

Sad face.... I was hoping for something more when it came to the next game in the series......

SH3 has GWX but poor graphics, SH4 has nicer graphics but a lesser array of mods, and SH5 was shot in the knee before it ever got out of the gate...

Cant we just have a game thats like GWX with the graphics of SH5 with proper interiors and more than just a skeleton crew?

Oh well... thats the end of my rant.

Sailor Steve · 05-11-12, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drEaPer

Conclusion: You are a doomsayer.

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

Dowly · 05-11-12, 04:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

This is true.

drEaPer · 05-11-12, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Not at all. All I'm saying is if you have to pay to get the fullest benefit, then no matter how you twist it it's not really free.

So its not a drug, thats a step forward.

Also: What you say is true and the case for all commercially
developed games.

So after back and forth, I think we can come to the agreement, that F2P should be called F2T =Free 2 Test/Try. Like a demo with largely reduced scope.

Sailor Steve · 05-11-12, 08:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drEaPer

Also: What you say is true and the case for all commercially
developed games.

But they rarely tell you it's free.

Quote:

So after back and forth, I think we can come to the agreement, that F2P should be called F2T =Free 2 Test/Try. Like a demo with largely reduced scope.

So you admit it's not free. That's a step forward for you.

Ducimus · 05-11-12, 10:37 AM

Free to play really is a farce. Actually, i take that back, its marketing genius. Some free to play models are better then others. I personally never tried Free 2 play until:

a.) Age of Conan
This F2P model acted more like an extended trial. Certain features were limited that really aids character progression. For example, in this game, certain areas are needed to progress your character - they happen to be premium only. So you have road blocks set up, that either slow you down, or make it agonizing to play without subscribing. This F2P model is very easy to see through. There's no microtransactions, your just deliberately road blocked at certain key areas. It is in effect an extended trial. You cannot progress at certain key points without subscribing.

b.) Lord of the Rings Online
This model, consists of microtransactions. The game doesnt force via road blocks you can't get around without subscribing, instead you buy access to the area via turbine points. These points are sold in lots that come out to like 5, 10, 20, or 50 US dollars or something like that. If something costs 100 turbine points to access, you have to buy like 500 turbine points, being the lowest increment of points you can buy (or something like that).

Long story short with LOTR, they nickel and dime you via turbine points. Need more backback space? That'll cost you. Want access to certain skills? That'll cost you. They charge via small amounts of turbine pionts, id even say each transaction is a pittance. So it doesn't seem like your spending lots of cash - until you start adding it all up. Over the course of 3 months before i got bored and quit, i had spent the cash equivlant of 6 months premium subscripton in microtransactions. So they got twice the money out of me, for the same time period. Considering i'm stingy with my money, that is absolute genius on their part!

Free 2 play is not free.

Julhelm · 05-11-12, 10:59 AM

It was never supposed to be free. Like I stated in the other thread, I worked as a developer on a title that made the transition from traditional pay-to-play to free-to-play precisely because it was found that F2P is orders of magnitude more profitable in the long run. Instead of relying on sales you basically get a consistent income and you can stimulate ingame purchases by introducing "new" items that basically take a day or two to implement. While I totally agree that this way of basically reducing the customer to what amounts to a wallet on legs from which you seek to extract money is rather nauseating, you can't really fault corporations for moving to a more profitable businessmodel when their entire reason for existing is to be profitable to their share owners.

Ducimus · 05-11-12, 11:04 AM

My main beef with "Free 2 play", is that the name used to describe this sales model, is deceptive and misleading. I'd even go as far as to say it is false advertisement.

Julhelm · 05-11-12, 12:40 PM

Well, it is free in the sense that you can download the product and play it for free, as opposed to the traditional model where you buy a disc or download and pay up front.

It's funny how the first proto-MMO's like Warbirds and Aces High were free to download and play offline and only required a paid subscription to play online. If this new SH game used that model I don't think anyone would have complained at all.

7thSeal · 05-11-12, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KeldorKatarn

Guys, you should really learn the difference between publishers and developers. Ubisoft is just paying for this, they are not developing it.

Money is developing it, any way you look at it. Developers respond to those paying them. It doesn't matter how you slice it... money is the knife. Money is spent looking for a quick turn around nowadays. Quality is actually frowned upon as it cost more money for the corporate.

05-10-12, 03:37 PM	#260
Jimbuna Chief of the Boat Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: 250 metres below the surface Posts: 190,742 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 13	Let us not resort to name calling please.....disagreeing and discussing each others differences is fine but name calling and insults will not be tolerated. I thank every contributor in advance for their cooperation. __________________ Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something. Oh my God, not again!!

05-10-12, 02:07 PM	#259
Julhelm Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: The Icy North Posts: 693 Downloads: 189 Uploads: 0	Whatever, man. It's obvious that you have your beliefs firmly entrenched and are unwilling to look at things with an open mind, so the discussion is moot.

05-10-12, 11:23 PM	#261
JohnnyMacintosh Watch Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 17 Downloads: 62 Uploads: 0	Sad face.... I was hoping for something more when it came to the next game in the series...... SH3 has GWX but poor graphics, SH4 has nicer graphics but a lesser array of mods, and SH5 was shot in the knee before it ever got out of the gate... Cant we just have a game thats like GWX with the graphics of SH5 with proper interiors and more than just a skeleton crew? Oh well... thats the end of my rant.

05-11-12, 10:37 AM	#266
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	Free to play really is a farce. Actually, i take that back, its marketing genius. Some free to play models are better then others. I personally never tried Free 2 play until: a.) Age of Conan This F2P model acted more like an extended trial. Certain features were limited that really aids character progression. For example, in this game, certain areas are needed to progress your character - they happen to be premium only. So you have road blocks set up, that either slow you down, or make it agonizing to play without subscribing. This F2P model is very easy to see through. There's no microtransactions, your just deliberately road blocked at certain key areas. It is in effect an extended trial. You cannot progress at certain key points without subscribing. b.) Lord of the Rings Online This model, consists of microtransactions. The game doesnt force via road blocks you can't get around without subscribing, instead you buy access to the area via turbine points. These points are sold in lots that come out to like 5, 10, 20, or 50 US dollars or something like that. If something costs 100 turbine points to access, you have to buy like 500 turbine points, being the lowest increment of points you can buy (or something like that). Long story short with LOTR, they nickel and dime you via turbine points. Need more backback space? That'll cost you. Want access to certain skills? That'll cost you. They charge via small amounts of turbine pionts, id even say each transaction is a pittance. So it doesn't seem like your spending lots of cash - until you start adding it all up. Over the course of 3 months before i got bored and quit, i had spent the cash equivlant of 6 months premium subscripton in microtransactions. So they got twice the money out of me, for the same time period. Considering i'm stingy with my money, that is absolute genius on their part! Free 2 play is not free.

05-11-12, 10:59 AM	#267
Julhelm Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: The Icy North Posts: 693 Downloads: 189 Uploads: 0	It was never supposed to be free. Like I stated in the other thread, I worked as a developer on a title that made the transition from traditional pay-to-play to free-to-play precisely because it was found that F2P is orders of magnitude more profitable in the long run. Instead of relying on sales you basically get a consistent income and you can stimulate ingame purchases by introducing "new" items that basically take a day or two to implement. While I totally agree that this way of basically reducing the customer to what amounts to a wallet on legs from which you seek to extract money is rather nauseating, you can't really fault corporations for moving to a more profitable businessmodel when their entire reason for existing is to be profitable to their share owners.

05-11-12, 11:04 AM	#268
Ducimus Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 12,987 Downloads: 67 Uploads: 2	My main beef with "Free 2 play", is that the name used to describe this sales model, is deceptive and misleading. I'd even go as far as to say it is false advertisement.

05-11-12, 12:40 PM	#269
Julhelm Seasoned Skipper Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: The Icy North Posts: 693 Downloads: 189 Uploads: 0	Well, it is free in the sense that you can download the product and play it for free, as opposed to the traditional model where you buy a disc or download and pay up front. It's funny how the first proto-MMO's like Warbirds and Aces High were free to download and play offline and only required a paid subscription to play online. If this new SH game used that model I don't think anyone would have complained at all.