Star Wars Galaxies Players Start Petition to Stop Closure
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
Depends really on how they go with it. I've played f2p games out there where the store items did not personally affect my gameplay at all for not having them. Some companies simply do not understand how to implement their system and thus break what should have originally been a really great title by turning it into a "Pay2win" game.Woodsey said:
If you're going to sell gear for a small price in a f2p game for example. It should be mostly cosmetically appealing and give only a minor benefit, if any benefit at all. In fact I'd like to see more games take the route of adding more cosmetics to their games for purchase, allowing players to pick up something to make them stand out more and personalized.
A few bad examples of this would be All Points Bulletin reborn. They give the option to buy a permanent weapon.. That's awesome! They decide to make it $60.. *facepalm* Really a shame that they're focusing more on that portion of the game when APB:R really shines when it comes to character design. They could have done so much to add more cosmetics so players can really create unique characters that stand out. They made a great design system and they're not finding ways to benefit from that.
Another bad example is S4 League. From what I'm told, the shop items truly overpower anything you can get in game, thus making it purely pay 2 win and if you want to stand a chance, then you must release yourself from some of your money. I refuse to play that game and any game that has that problem for this very reason.
A good example of this. A lot of Dungeon Fighter online's store consists of cosmetics. In fact, to change your look in the game, you need to spend some money. I personally do not mind having the default character, because the content is all available and I am more focused on the gameplay itself than anything else.
Dungeons and Dragons online. Free2play but also gives the option of subbing. If you don't feel like subbing, then you can go into the store and purchase what you feel is necessary for you. You have a variety of options there. They lock certain classes and races, and not all quests are available late game, but so far that has not hindered me in anyway from enjoying the content. They give you in cashpoints as rewards in game as well, so you can pick some stuff up where necessary. So far I haven't spent any money on any of these games, but if I am continuing to enjoy them as much as I have, I wouldn't mind supporting the companies.
If SW:TOR went f2p, what's gonna make or break it is how the implement the store. If they do it wrong, then they're going to lose a lot. However, I read some where that they are using some sort of sub-method that, instead of paying a fixed amount (usually 15 dollars US a month) They will keep track of how long you play in the game, and only charge you for your online time, so that way if you're not a frequent player, you won't feel forced to play the game just to make it feel worth the amount of money you're spending on it per month.
I don't know if they're still going with this method but... As far as sub-based games go, I personally accept that more than standard $15 dollars a month, especially if there are free to play games out there with the exact same gameplay mechanics as the one that requires a subscription. (Here's looking at you WoW.)
A nice gesture, but ultimately fruitless.
Star Wars Galaxies was one of the biggest flops in MMO history, and will go quietly into the night, surprisingly late in the game I might add.
Besides, this is also a tactical move in an attempt to get the Galaxies players into The Old Republic, one that I think will ultimately work.
Star Wars Galaxies was one of the biggest flops in MMO history, and will go quietly into the night, surprisingly late in the game I might add.
Besides, this is also a tactical move in an attempt to get the Galaxies players into The Old Republic, one that I think will ultimately work.
They should just ask for the server software. It's pretty useless to the company if the servers are shut down and there's plenty of work going into emulation already anyway.
Oh your referring to F2P base game with micro-transactions for added features like DDO. Understandable but you gotta remember that someones got to pay for server maintenance and upgrading which is not cheap.Woodsey said:
And I am sure that is precisely why MMO companies hate foresight (and a sense of ownership, to be fair). I positively agree with your sentiment, and it certainly opens up the discussion on DLC and downloaded games, which at least are not tethered to a multiplayer server, subscription fees, ect. It is that very investment of both monetary resources and assumed dedication and enjoyment (because you wouldn't be paying $X a month for something only moderately amusing to turn on ever blue moon) that makes a MMO situation like this one especially delicate. A consumer goes in, gets hooked, but once the server is closed, they are out on the virtual streets without a chance to ever go back for nostalgia's sake.Krantos said:
For me, that would have been like being unable to ever play Morrowind again just because Oblivion came out.
It would be a good idea on Lucasart's part to make it F2P. Take this example.
Team Fortress 2. Before it was F2P, the peak about of players never rose above 30,000.
Now it being F2P, it's peaked at over 100,000.
Team Fortress 2. Before it was F2P, the peak about of players never rose above 30,000.
Now it being F2P, it's peaked at over 100,000.
