+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: soooooo, how much p2w will be in the cash shop this time trion?

  1. #1

    soooooo, how much p2w will be in the cash shop this time trion?

    going to RUIN yet another fresh start by allowing regrade charms to exist in the cash shop? OR DID YOU LEARN YOUR LESSON? NOTHING is more broken than a bought yellow charm making you have a full tier over everyone else that allows you to 2 shot everyone, ON DAY 2. if you do a fresh start for 5.0. NO BLOODY CHARMS OR ANYTHING P2W IN THE BLOODY CASH SHOP ON THE FIRST BLOODY DAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!


    do you understand us? NO REGRADE CHARMS IN CASH SHOP, COSTUMES ONLY. you will not only get more plays. you will KEEP your players.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    385
    I'm pretty sure they can only hold of putting in charms until XL says they are required to put it in. I can't post the video but Khrolan said something like this during the last fresh start.

    Either way, calm down. Make a more constructive post to get your point across. lol
    Xhisors
    Enigmatist --- Spellsong --- Daggerspell
    Honor Bound | Commander

  3. #3
    Senior Member Saryasino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    307
    These P2W threads always bring some humour to my day. If everyone played this game for free then it wouldn't be here to play. There has to be revenue at some level of profit or else it can't exist. It's as simple as that. You as the consumer have to decide how much you want to invest towards your gaming experience. Keep in mind though you get what you pay for.
    Thunder Lotus Guild
    Aria, Formerly of Namia and Kraken - West To visit our website click here

  4. #4
    Senior Member Rekikyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Saryasino View Post
    These P2W threads always bring some humour to my day. If everyone played this game for free then it wouldn't be here to play. There has to be revenue at some level of profit or else it can't exist. It's as simple as that. You as the consumer have to decide how much you want to invest towards your gaming experience. Keep in mind though you get what you pay for.
    It's called a subscription.

    P.S. You do realize the most profitable game in the world by FAR ..... neither has a p2w item mall, nor does it have a subscription. League of Legends purely makes billions off skins and champion sales.

    Grinding Gear Games' Path of Exile (also purchased by Tencent) also follows a similar model: Almost 0 p2w mechanics (there are warehouse pages, but that's not really a p2w mechanism as much as a "store more items" mechanic). They too.... make their money off people buying skins/decorations.

    And you know what's really interesting about both? Neither has hemorrhaged players in their first few years, nor do they have sharp declines in interest. They are seeing downward trends as time goes on..... but we're talking 12% loss of searchables a year, versus games like this one that lose 50% of greater a year.

    So. No. You do not have to p2w. If anything, it's the largest culprit of game failure, and Archeage/ Jake Song didn't get the message.

    Archeage could have been a billion dollar MMO. That's how awesome it was, and possibilties to customize. Instead they killed half their population's interest every 6 months - Year, merged, took away assets, and don't even offer substantial discounts on their sales. In fact, they increased the price of their subscription as they lost players.

    Even Black Desert, which has clunky controls and boating systems.... was more of an overall success than Archeage at retaining players. And yeah. It has a tiny bit more P2W than PoE or LoL, but it doesn't TOUCH AA's P2W.

    And to top it off..... Archeage set the non p2w gearing curve at about 5 years for serious gear, and then increased the tiers on top of that. Rational game developers don't do that. They realize.... people want to pvp in the first year..... without getting 1 shot. They want a chance to beat top guilds at castles and world bosses.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Muido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Rekikyo View Post
    It's called a subscription.

    P.S. You do realize the most profitable game in the world by FAR ..... neither has a p2w item mall, nor does it have a subscription. League of Legends purely makes billions off skins and champion sales.

    Grinding Gear Games' Path of Exile (also purchased by Tencent) also follows a similar model: Almost 0 p2w mechanics (there are warehouse pages, but that's not really a p2w mechanism as much as a "store more items" mechanic). They too.... make their money off people buying skins/decorations.

    And you know what's really interesting about both? Neither has hemorrhaged players in their first few years, nor do they have sharp declines in interest. They are seeing downward trends as time goes on..... but we're talking 12% loss of searchables a year, versus games like this one that lose 50% of greater a year.

    So. No. You do not have to p2w. If anything, it's the largest culprit of game failure, and Archeage/ Jake Song didn't get the message.

    Archeage could have been a billion dollar MMO. That's how awesome it was, and possibilties to customize. Instead they killed half their population's interest every 6 months - Year, merged, took away assets, and don't even offer substantial discounts on their sales. In fact, they increased the price of their subscription as they lost players.

    Even Black Desert, which has clunky controls and boating systems.... was more of an overall success than Archeage at retaining players. And yeah. It has a tiny bit more P2W than PoE or LoL, but it doesn't TOUCH AA's P2W.

    And to top it off..... Archeage set the non p2w gearing curve at about 5 years for serious gear, and then increased the tiers on top of that. Rational game developers don't do that. They realize.... people want to pvp in the first year..... without getting 1 shot. They want a chance to beat top guilds at castles and world bosses.
    League of Legends the most profitable game in the world by far? Even Space Invaders made more revenue

    But I agree on this one. There is no need for p2w for a game to do well. ArcheAge could do great with just image items for cash/credits.

  6. #6
    Senior Member wooglemoogle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by Rekikyo View Post

    So. No. You do not have to p2w. If anything, it's the largest culprit of game failure, and Archeage/ Jake Song didn't get the message.

    Archeage could have been a billion dollar MMO. That's how awesome it was, and possibilties to customize. Instead they killed half their population's interest every 6 months - Year, merged, took away assets, and don't even offer substantial discounts on their sales. In fact, they increased the price of their subscription as they lost players.
    No, they got the message. They ♥♥♥♥ed up, plain and simple. What you don't get is that the examples you listed are exceptions, not the norm. All of these games had a choice, pick a safe route or a risky one. PoE and LoL took risks, but they also made sure that their project's scope would be sustainable so that they wouldn't kill themselves if it didn't work out. And they were lucky enough that their game design resonated with their audience and built up enough momentum that they could keep growing without heavily compromising their monetization model.

    ArcheAge also took a risk. But their scope wasn't sustainable and while their game design hit home for a lot of players, it wasn't good enough to grow that momentum or to recoup the risks they'd taken. They introduced P2W to survive, put ArcheAge on maintenance mode, tried again with Civilization Online and failed once more. Even though Civilization Online was also innovative and wasn't nearly as P2W, it died while ArcheAge still survives.

    People saying ArcheAge could have become massive if it just stayed its course are dreamers. All of XL's games except for ArcheAge have shutdown and ArcheAge has only survived because they compromised on P2W, on the game's direction, on their vision for the game. ArcheAge is an example of a failure that dirtied its hands to keep living and still struggles with the consequences to this day.

    So yes, they had to P2W.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Rekikyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,435
    Quote Originally Posted by Muido View Post
    League of Legends the most profitable game in the world by far? Even Space Invaders made more revenue

    But I agree on this one. There is no need for p2w for a game to do well. ArcheAge could do great with just image items for cash/credits.
    Space Invaders has made about $1 billion in 30 years.

    League of Legends makes 1.5-2.6 Billion a YEAR.

    Archeage...... even in year one and two.... was only a $30 MILLION game.

  8. #8
    Senior Member Rekikyo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,435
    Quote Originally Posted by wooglemoogle View Post
    No, they got the message. They ♥♥♥♥ed up, plain and simple. What you don't get is that the examples you listed are exceptions, not the norm. All of these games had a choice, pick a safe route or a risky one. PoE and LoL took risks, but they also made sure that their project's scope would be sustainable so that they wouldn't kill themselves if it didn't work out. And they were lucky enough that their game design resonated with their audience and built up enough momentum that they could keep growing without heavily compromising their monetization model.

    ArcheAge also took a risk. But their scope wasn't sustainable and while their game design hit home for a lot of players, it wasn't good enough to grow that momentum or to recoup the risks they'd taken. They introduced P2W to survive, put ArcheAge on maintenance mode, tried again with Civilization Online and failed once more. Even though Civilization Online was also innovative and wasn't nearly as P2W, it died while ArcheAge still survives.

    People saying ArcheAge could have become massive if it just stayed its course are dreamers. All of XL's games except for ArcheAge have shutdown and ArcheAge has only survived because they compromised on P2W, on the game's direction, on their vision for the game. ArcheAge is an example of a failure that dirtied its hands to keep living and still struggles with the consequences to this day.

    So yes, they had to P2W.
    1) No. Literally every game that attempts to be non p2w grosses higher revenues than those who do, and for longer. I challenge you to find exceptions to that rule.

    2) Archeage was p2w DAY ONE. They never migrated to it. It was part of the design on the very first day of open servers. In addition to a subscription.

    3) Their Scope was sustainable if they actually managed labor cost to time ratios correctly, considered eliminating or making taxes more free player friendly, and eliminating the subscription. Their entire game model was designed to be a trap to make sure you logged in to pay those taxes. People didn't play Archeage because it was fun. They played it because the owned a cool plot of land they designed, gear they invested real money in, and because there was a real risk of losing it if they didn't pay their taxes. And then they found out they could lose it anyways through a server merger.

    If instead, their focus was on releasing costumes/aesthetics, and the other things were accessible, they would have sold 20 times as much cosmetics. But who wants to buy cosmetics when they can't afford to play vs p2w? Instead of buying 20-30 costumes, most people bought one - two or none.

    4) We never said Archeage was on course to begin with. We simply state it could have been a multi billion dollar game rather than a small multi million dollar game. It had the characters. It had the pvp POTENTIAL. It had the reasons to provoke pvp. It had customization.

    But..... instead of embracing these things, Trion/XL ignored them. They destroyed the pvp with p2w. They destroyed the reasons to pvp for the majority of the community, by simply making farm areas non pvp, and then by changing trade packs. The diminutized customization by risking losing it to taxation, and to server merges.

    Jake Song has said on several occasions: We want to focus on a farming game. Every change they made post Year 1 to the game, was to encourage farming, and safe play.

    No. They didn't.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Muido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    544
    Quote Originally Posted by Rekikyo View Post
    Space Invaders has made about $1 billion in 30 years.

    League of Legends makes 1.5-2.6 Billion a YEAR.

    Archeage...... even in year one and two.... was only a $30 MILLION game.
    Tell me more. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ame_franchises
    2.1 billion in 2017, not every year, which is quite a difference.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    1,724
    If you're smart, you're going Hiram and charms are irrelevant.

    The more you know...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts