And he stated that HE didn't play p2p games with cash shops. What was your point other than to simply be a contrarian?Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_%28pronoun%29
Acceptable Cash Shop Items: Suggestions!
Printable View
-
06-01-2014, 06:50 PMJatohCynn
-
06-01-2014, 07:00 PMIkedaMMOs that failed due to being a lazily developed WoW clone or double dipping cash shop include: RIFT (not sure if it had a cash shop but self admitted WoW clone), Aion (vanity cash shop and possibly more on top of being the biggest WoW clone from Korea), TERA (everything except the combat was generic crap copied out of WoW and they tried to add a cash shop when their subscriptions were low also went F2P within about a year), SWTOR (didn't even last as a P2P game for a year, not sure if it added the cash shop before going F2P), Lord Of The Rings Online (cash shop and WoW clone), Elder Scrolls Online (hasn't failed yet but is already on its way down because of the generic solo-centric content copied from WoW and the cash shop), DC Universe Online (again with the solo-centric content, not sure if the cash shop was added before it went F2P), Champions Online (same as DC Universe Online), Warhammer Online (again WoW clone, don't know if a cash shop was involved), Everquest 2 (tried to copy WoW which was already a dumbed down copy of the original everquest again with the stupidity), Vanguard Online (as far as I remember WoW clone with some slight sandbox elements).Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
Do you really need a bigger list? I could go on.
Also here's a question. Do you have any evidence or statistics to disprove my claims? Because so far all it seems you're doing is trying and failing at the whole "let's paint the different opinion as a conspiracy nut so people are afraid to agree with them" tactic.
As far as I've been told by someone I know who has been incapable of playing the game since the 8.1 update yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
-
06-01-2014, 07:04 PMSaccharin
There are no acceptable cash shop items in a sub game. If they can't sustain the game with the current sub price then increase the sub price.
-
06-01-2014, 07:07 PMJatohCynnYou were quoting Keberon, not Ikeda.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
-
06-01-2014, 07:08 PMReiszRieSo they're your opinions, not statistics as you've previously claimed. Right, in that sense, everything can be a WoW clone in your opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
and as your examples have shown, their demise isn't explicitly due to micro transactions but because the game just wasn't popular enough to retain players, hence a hail mary on their part to remain afloat, micro trasactiosn are often the result, not the cause of MMOs failing. None of those examples are indication of micro trasactions being the sole factor that causes P2P to fail (and a handful of them aren't even P2P.)
I'd like statistics or even just articles from reputable sources attributing cash shops as the primary factor that otherwise healthy P2P MMOs fail; that was your argument right? that cash shops causes games to fail. -
06-01-2014, 07:10 PMReiszRieMy mistake, I've edited my post to reflect on that mistake.Quote:
Originally Posted by JatohCynn
-
06-01-2014, 07:21 PMShinigamiZeroNot really, because I pay monthly and not just once. Why should I pay additionally on top of my subscription? Might as well make the game like guild wars 2 where you pay once and have a cash shop because I don't see a difference. I am paying monthly for constant updates and decent servers. If I am to pay on top of that, the game might as well go the guild wars 2 route.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
-
06-01-2014, 07:35 PMskatergerI don't see how this proves anything that cash shops are the bane of MMOs. You literally just listed all the most popular mmos over the past 7-8 years and in your opinion they all "failed". You have to keep in mind that no game can be labelled successful if you are using World of Warcraft as your baseline benchmark. If anything, it only proves that the MMORPG genre has gotten stale and innovation is desperately needed. I also don't see how being a Wow clone cam be tied in to your argument of cash shops = fail since Wow's blizzard store has been around for a long time (though the recent lvl 90 boost was the only real p2w feature).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
I'm actually standing on your side of the fence but I just don't see how the above arguments substantiate your point. -
06-01-2014, 07:47 PMIkeda1. It isn't a opinion it's a simple fact based on common sense. Can you give me even a single logical reason why anyone would want to play a copy of WoW that has less content than the original? It's all a pattern. They get falsely hyped by advertising thinking "finally a new mmo that isn't WoW :D I'm tired of that old game", quickly realize they're playing a copy of WoW with less content than the original, then they take 1 of 4 paths. They go back to WoW, they try their luck at the next "new" mmo or try some generic F2P game (repeat cycle), they opt out of mmos altogether because the genre is far too homogenized due to braindead developers and WoW's unfortunate success, they stick around for a while in the futile hope that the developers will one day actually try to make the game unique only to be disappointed and eventually go down 1 of the other 3 paths (I'm currently on path #4 when it comes to FFXIV). Also when I say WoW clone I mean the game over-emphasizes solo content and fast leveling all to get to a overhyped "endgame", is based around the themepark model where you're led down a set path by quest npcs, and it usually has the same outdated tab-targeting combat we've had since before WoW even existed although that doesn't always necessarily make it a WoW clone (the other parts are almost always guaranteed to be included though).Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
2. Microtransactions may not be the sole factor in the failure of those games but they were almost always the final nail in the coffin for them for the games that were foolish enough to add a cash shop before going F2P. You also don't need statistics to show that cash shops cause people to leave P2P games and honestly do you think anyone's bothered to make any "official" statistics charts for it? I can't even find a compiled list of all the failed P2P mmos. I had to list those off of what I remember reading from individual articles or watching the mmos fail first hand myself. I actually saw a few people like you begging for a cash shop in the TERA online forums back when it was still P2P. Then those people finally got what they wanted, I and many others instantly quit the second the cash shop was added for the reasons I've stated in this thread and the game failed within the year.
3. Also every single mmo I listed started out as a P2P game. Most have gone F2P and Vanguard (as far as I remember) was shut down once, brought back as F2P and then quickly shut down again for good.
The definition of successful I'm using here is the definition for a successful P2P game. As in a mmo that starts out as P2P and never has to dumb down to F2P to survive. They don't need WoW's subscription numbers obviously they only need enough to stay profitable.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaterger
A list of successful P2P mmos would be: Ultima Online, FFXI, Star Wars Galaxies (it was eventually shut down to force players to play SWTOR when it was first released, funny considering how quickly SWTOR failed), WoW (unfortunately), EVE Online, honestly I can't think of many others because it seems the list of successful P2P games are all noticeably very old mmos. Dark Age Of Camelot and Asheron's Call if those are still running as P2P but not sure if they are. Notice how every other mmo that has been able to survive as a P2P game were all created before WoW and you sort of notice a problem with the genre. Before WoW every new mmo was actually a new freaking mmo in some way or another. Then WoW had the ridiculous success it had and suddenly all mmo developers became braindead and got tunnel vision. Getting the delusion that WoW is some sort of "perfect template" for creating a successful P2P game when it's nothing more than a overly casual copy of Everquest.
The point I've been trying to get at with that is every P2P mmo that has attempted to add a cash shop has had to go F2P or shut down due to loss of subscriptions and the only reason WoW's been able to survive with a cash shop is because of the sheer amount of subscriptions it has combined with the fact that because almost every new mmo being released is essentially a clone of WoW with less content the players don't really have anywhere to go to if they leave WoW so they just put up with it. They're pretty much trapped there.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaterger
-
06-01-2014, 09:33 PMMalamasalaCare to attempt an argument in favor of your opinion?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerberon
Because from a business stand point, selling "catch up" to customers will bring in additional revenue and keep players around longer because they will not give up after being left behind. This is good for the customer and good for the company, which is win-win situation.
Of course, from a complainers point of view, you'd list things like:
- A person buying level 50 would ruin the game for everyone else because they'd have zero skill and kill everyone in dungeons.
But lets be honest here. Even if you leveled all classes to 50 on your own, and entered Titan Hard without reading up or watching a video, you'd die anyway. Skill or no skill, 99% of FF14 is learning each battle. -
06-01-2014, 10:40 PMOMEGAlomania
Come back in to make one last post, i'm not going to address anyone specifically or try to change anyones opinion, clearly they are beyond that.
Can I just say how disgusting I think it is that people not only EXPECT an in game cash shop these days, but that they are also willing to DEFEND it or activley attempt to get one added? Time was (feels like a stupid long time ago now) that when you bought a game or carried out a subscription, you got a complete purchase and access to everything within it. The disgusting anti consumer practices of companies like EA and the horrendous wild west of money grubbing microtransaction filled AppStore can't really have conditioned this many people to think this is okay, surely?
Oh, wait...
Eurgh.
Screw it, lets get them to turn it in to FFXIV All The Bravest and be done with it eh? At least I won't feel like i'm missing out on anything. -
06-01-2014, 10:58 PMRose_Vilehart
Bloodclaw stop it you jackass, this is a sub based game, they are not going to add a cash shop unless it turns ftp and considering how many more people they got than expected that wont happen for a very long time
Seriously though you keep proving how much of a troll you are, you complain about this game being p2w then start a thread about what we should have in cash shops.... -
06-01-2014, 11:06 PMRazzle
I think NA should just have their own server with cash shop and stuff since they seem to be the ones that like to throw additional money at everything to "keep the servers alive" lol
I'd like the game to stay P2P without cash shop, I already don't support the in-game benefits lolMogStation give you. -
06-01-2014, 11:08 PMRose_VilehartThose are just "play our game longer we give you stuff!" benefitsQuote:
Originally Posted by Razzle
-
06-01-2014, 11:11 PMRazzleTalking about retainers and Fantasia, not vet rewardQuote:
Originally Posted by Rose_Vilehart
I'm kind of tierd to repeat that, but take for example Fantasia.
It could be (or could not be) that SE had more plans to aestecian to be able to edit more about your character. With Fantasia added to lolMogStation, they are basically encouraged not to add and expand on Aestacian in game.
With retainers added, SE is encouraged to make as many more items and materials (on top of the many useless materials we already have) and/or require more matrials in furure crafts, in order to fill our inventory better. It doesn't mean they will do it, but the encourgment to do it is defintly there.
The players are okay because ATM its not as bad. See you when we have 5 more jobs. See you when level capped si raised (tier 6 on top of the tiers we already have). Let's see how well you will do with 2 retainers.
Every addition to lolMogStation is going to "hurt" the game, if not directly, then in another way. -
06-01-2014, 11:30 PMFelisThe plans for aestecians is simpleQuote:
Originally Posted by Razzle
everything that don't change the gender, race, bone structure or skin color, also everything an aestecian can do without needing a doctor title. -
06-02-2014, 12:20 AMRazzleOnly that it's not a real life one, we're in a fantasy world XP Eitherway my point still stands, it could have been in plans for another NPC for example, if not the aestecian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Felis
I personally know games that Aestecians do let you change those D: -
06-02-2014, 12:35 AMSeif
None.
I pay for this game to avoid all the bs suggested in this thread.
That all should be content within the game anything else is unacepptable use of our sub money. -
06-02-2014, 12:51 AMSkull_Angel
So what I gather now is that nothing has changed;
- People are still evangelically spreading the gospel of how things should be run without realizing it's only an opinion and not some law or the word of some god.
- A few people continue to question the opinions of those that oppose the idea [of cash shops], but are met with the same baseless replies.
- No one really seems to realize that the architecture for a cash shop was created with the launch of 2.0.
- The original topic still continues to be ignored because "it's wrong!" to begin with.
The Mog Station was created with the explicit idea of micro transactions in mind. The developers could have left the payment service as it was with account.square-enix.com, but they decided to create a whole new site dedicated to transactions for FFXIV. This tells us that extra services through micro transactions were highly considered at one point and the expansion of which is more than likely to become a reality at some point.
Any successful P2P MMO quickly becomes a cash cow and it can be milked in more than one way; companies understand this, but history shows us that it must be done carefully. OP wanted to know which ways were acceptable and got a few good answers, but a lot of nonsense as well.
I still continue to want to see more replies to OP, but doubt that will happen at this point. It is an honest question and I still agree that cash shops can be done in a way that does not negatively impact the community on a notable scale; has it been done so before? Yes, but not by many. -
06-02-2014, 01:21 AMReiszRieThe OP wasn't looking for constructive discussion, he created this thread with the sole intention of it being a flamebait.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bloodclaw
-
06-02-2014, 01:41 AMRose_Vilehart
"Would you prefer actual collage level course learning in video game design and market. You know I am trying to to boast that around, but if you want to put my credability into judgement, toll, you might want to go else where. I have had talks with my proffessors who recently worked at EA and Bethesda Games. So STFU"
as someone who also takes a college course in game design...........have you actually got a job designing games yet? or finished your course? unless you have please stop pretending you are "teh master of game design knowledge!" -
06-02-2014, 01:43 AMShinkuTachihttp://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/b...3904424080.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Bloodclaw
-
06-02-2014, 01:45 AMRose_Vilehartoh god as much as i love this gif i know what anime it is from and lets just say that what has been seen cannot be unseenQuote:
Originally Posted by ShinkuTachi
-
06-02-2014, 01:58 AMJatohCynnAs others have stated, it's possible but highly unlikely and once a game starts down the road it rarely decides to turn around. There's only one Hilmar Veigar Pétursson, and he already works for CCP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
In which a AAA CEO apologizes for putting a cash shop into a p2p MMO
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/2672 -
06-02-2014, 02:05 AMSkull_AngelAhaha, I didn't realize who OP was when I started posting, that's what I get for looking at the forums when I wake up.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReiszRie
It still would have been nice to hear more constructive thought on the matter.
Yes, I know, understand and have posted such. What I don't quite understand is all who oppose the thought and immediately attack others with nonsense, as if they know the details and outcome. I've questioned them again and again to be met with the same replies; either I'm insane for continually missing some key well known information or...Quote:
Originally Posted by JatohCynn
-
06-02-2014, 02:18 AMIkedaWhat you're suggesting isn't even acceptable according to history. The cash shop TERA Online had before going F2P was nothing but vanity. Little useless skins for weapons that honestly weren't appealing in the least. They looked worse than what you could earn in the actual game. Yet the very idea of a double dipping cash shop drove people away no matter how little it affected them because of the principle behind it that it lowers the value of their subscription and makes the customer feel like they're being ripped off. So once again for the last freaking time THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ACCEPTABLE CASH SHOP ITEMS FOR A P2P GAME. While fools like you have been beaten over the head by so many companies trying to screw you for every dime in your wallet that you're getting the delusion that it's acceptable to spread your cheeks before a company has even decided to screw you there's many others out there that believe that a cash shop in a P2P game, no matter how little affect it has on them, will devalue their subscription and generally makes them feel ripped off to the point that they simply quit the game. History has proven time and time again that the number of the players that think like this is large enough to kill off entire games when they leave. I swear the stupidity in this thread is going to give me a aneurism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
-
06-02-2014, 02:24 AMLuxxhttp://24.media.tumblr.com/502bbf06e...10fwo1_500.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
If you do so happen to gain an Aneurism.
Mayth haveth thou stuffth? O:
Specifically your Atma Omnilex. -cough; -
06-02-2014, 02:25 AMRose_Vilehartjust leave and go back to having fun in game, this thread really isnt worth your time......Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
-
06-02-2014, 02:33 AMJatohCynnBecause we've seen what happens when games do this. Either games put them in as a last ditch effort to stay afloat after going f2p and never manage to come back to what they were (SWToR Terra ect.), or they launch with one and relegate the majority of their in game additions to the cash shop and lock content behind RNG lottery boxes (GW2).Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
In short, people think it will ruin the game or betray it's spirit. You can't really expect to suggest such a change and not have people get upset by the idea.
I've watched worse vitriol come out of the GW2 forums over people just suggesting mounts in a game without any because it will "make it like WoW" -
06-02-2014, 02:41 AMSkull_AngelFrom my understanding the developers of TERA thought they could increase their player base and bring in more money by going F2P and expanding their cash shop. They did such because they saw a trend in current P2P MMOs only holding on to a dedicated/hardcore player base after the initial "hype" phase after release. Whether it worked or not to bring in a larger player base, it ended up losing a lot of it's hardcore/dedicated players. The failure didn't come from having the cash shop, it came from expanding it and going F2P, at least that's what I understand from articles and testimonies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
I haven't really suggested anything myself, I've even stated that it's my opinion that the inclusion of P2W elements is unacceptable. I have been questioning why offering additional aesthetic options via cash shop would be such a horrible thing though, and have only gotten one real good answer.
Companies look to make money, that's what they do. They look to find ways to make more money constantly and weigh the positives and negatives of doing certain things; cash shops done in a certain way are able to create a lot of revenue at minimal cost [when done in a way that's acceptable to most of the community].
This is more of what I've been seeking, and it reflects what I've observed so far in this thread. So, because people believe it will ruin the game it should not be attempted in the first place, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by JatohCynn
-
06-02-2014, 02:57 AMIkeda1. What happened with TERA is they started as P2P with no cash shop, had a decent amount of subscriptions that not very slowly started leaking away, decided to add a vanity cash shop (while it was still P2P) to try to "make up" for the lost subscriptions, the remaining players felt ripped off by the cash shop and saw the addition of a cash shop as a sign of failure and impending switch to F2P and promptly left, TERA temporarily shuts down and switches to a F2P model. Back when TERA first added the cash shop, En Masse tried to say there was no plans for the game to go F2P and yet it went F2P only a few months later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
2. You do not work for these companies, you have NOTHING to gain from the addition of a cash shop other than less money in your wallet should you decide to waste any on a cash shop. So I've got to ask why are you even suggesting one? So far SE has added nothing more than an equivalent to the server transfer services, character recreation, and something similar to how you could pay extra for mules in FFXI, all of these being services that have existed in P2P mmos long before cash shops were even thought up and yet for some reason you think that their addition is a sign of "things to come" that make a cash shop inevitable.
3. When people have witnessed first hand that the addition of cash shops cause a loss of subscriptions in a P2P mmo (and have even been part of those lost subscriptions themselves) then yes they have more than enough reason to believe that a cash shop will inevitably lead to the game shutting down or going F2P. -
06-02-2014, 02:58 AMRose_Vilehartthat and unlike tera this game has a steady good sub baseQuote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
-
06-02-2014, 03:13 AMKarnyboyYou and everyone else seeming to make these claims are speculative at best. Just because the inclusion of a cash shop into a game doesn't necessarily mean anything to its "failure" (or eventual death). There's many MMO's out there nobody has mentioned that a CS literally saved it from dying. These are shops implementing things correctly (DDO, Tera, LoTR to name a few)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
A cash shop should never be a replacement for a subscription to enjoy the game, nor should it be a means to advance your character. A steady income via subscriptions is still a viable stance to have with MMO gaming since servers and various other developing costs are a factor. However that being said, the inclusion of a CS should be flavor, not requirement. There's people out there that WANT to spend more money, maybe YOU don't, but there's others who have this spare money to spend, let them spend it as they see fit in a cash shop with items, etc that don't alter the outcome of a successful in game life. Who are you to say what they can and cannot do with their money? I believe things like retainers, Fantasia, weapon skins, armor skins, etc are suitable things that don't take away from actual game play.
This is how a CS should be done, and the ones that don't follow suit are the ones that do suffer/get cancelled.
Just remember that the MMO market has steadily increased since 1995, it IS saturated now, only a few games stand out and the reasons they fail are typically because of the stagnation in the market. You tell me how many games since WoW's peak success have just looked like WoW? We want innovation but even the innovative games get cancelled. So what do we want? As an avid MMO gamer that answer is not so cut/paste. Really think about what you are typing when you take such a strong stance against item shops. -
06-02-2014, 03:14 AMIkedaWhile I'm sure FFXIV has enough subscriptions to be profitable I have to question just how good its sub base is when SE is already resorting to PR speak like "over 2 million registered users" to advertise the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rose_Vilehart
-
06-02-2014, 03:20 AMHakuroDK
As long as the items don't unlock game content like dungeons or quest chains, and they don't grant gear with stats (except for stuff like the Bomb Earrings which grant a flavor-esque +2 Fire Resist that's pretty much negligible in the grand scheme of things), then I'm fine with a cash shop.
Vanity gear sets? Sure! Items like Fantasia that edit things that cannot necessarily be edited, but generally don't affect general gameplay (i.e. Namingway Cards for character/FC/Chocobo/Retainer, Holy Symbols of Twelve to change Patron Deity, etc)? Why not? Special housing items that look pretty? I can't see a reason why it would be a bad thing.
Hell, when I was still playing DCUO, there were even a few QOL items in the cash shop, like a one-use Summonable Repair/Mail/Bank NPC, and I don't see anything wrong with those either, because everyone has access to those same things if they go into towns. -
06-02-2014, 03:26 AMIkeda1. Every single one of those mmos you mentioned didn't survive as a P2P game. The addition of a cash shop was nothing more than a last ditch effort to make a profit when they were bleeding subscriptions to a point to where they didn't have enough subscriptions to stay profitable and it inevitably lead to them going F2P. In the sense of a P2P game yes they were a failure. If a P2P game fails to retain enough subscriptions to stay profitable then it obviously has been a failure as a game of that particular business model hence the reason they always switch to F2P.Quote:
Originally Posted by Karnyboy
2. While I understand that people have extra money they want to spend on vanity items or mounts or whatever other crap. In a game like FFXIV that is already adding more than enough vanity items and mounts in every single update and event for no additional charge included with the subscription fee and has even added a new feature to the game that has essentially turned every single piece of equipment in the game into a vanity item, I see absolutely zero need for an additional cash shop to provide more of these when there's already so many being added to the game without a cash shop. It makes them look less like "people with extra money to spend that just want vanity items" and more like "people with extra money to spend that want to feel special by having access to exclusive vanity items that other people either refuse to buy out of principle or can't afford to buy themselves". -
06-02-2014, 03:29 AMSkull_Angel1. I see no claims of such (TERA loosing mass subs because a cash shop was added). I do however see statements from En Masse saying they considered going F2P before TERA's launch, but decided not to because the game had not been designed for such. The cash shop was created with the explicit intention of going F2P and players left after realizing this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
2. You're right, I don't work for these companies and don't pretend to. I do understand how companies work though. I have asked questions about additional services, but bo far I seem to be running circles around the same question.
I'll also add to the statement of "something similar to how you could pay extra for mules in FFXI" by stating that for a very small amount more you can have access to extra character slots instead, but you can not send items directly to your other characters and need to use a proxy, making additional retainers more appealing. This may not effect most people, but for omni-crafters it's (extra inventory) something that is highly considered .
3. I want to say the majority hsn't witnessed first hand what the inclusion of cash shops do to a game's community, only heard claims of what happens without having all the information. In cases where it impacts the community negatively, P2W elements were added and the "unfair" advantages given to those that payed caused others that refused to fall behind and leave. In few very cases only aesthetic elements were added and a small portion of the community rage quit because of idealism (from direct observation I knew people that did this in WoW, but returned shortly despite their feelings). -
06-02-2014, 03:29 AMFelisThey didn't create a new payment side for transaction, but because the old payment side was too confusing for many people. It was one of the many 1.0 critics that needed to change for ARR.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
-
06-02-2014, 03:30 AMKarnyboyThey didn't survive as a P2P game because they were more of the same in a saturated market. As a business owner they went to CS to remain in business, it wasn't am attempt to gouge players. It was a way to have people involved keep their jobs. A CS in a P2P game can foster itself through the funds received to keep meaningless non-essential content on the way side without affecting the overall quality you pay for. I personally don't want my sub fee going into a $2.00 skin that makes my character look like a school girl and nothing more. Save that stuff for people that want that...in a cash shop so they can waste their money on that stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ikeda
-
06-02-2014, 03:47 AMIkedaYou don't see those claims because you weren't in the TERA forums at the time it was happening to witness it first hand like I was. En Masse didn't say a thing about going F2P when they added the cash shop. They simply added it and left it at that. Inevitably a s*** storm of threads popped up calling En Masse out on double dipping their customers and a few people asked if the cash shop was a sign of the game going F2P in the future. En Masse replied that there was no plans to go F2P. Many players in those threads said they would quit because they wouldn't tolerate a double dipping cash shop and promptly did quit (myself included). Apparently it was enough to force the game to change its payment model because it went F2P only a few months later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skull_Angel
So let me get this straight. The game is already adding vanity items for free but you don't think they should be included in the sub fee (because reasons) despite the fact you can simply ignore them entirely and go on with your life. Instead you think anyone that wants vanity items should be forced to pay extra despite the fact that SE has already shown they're willing to give them for free. Do you not see how freaking selfish this makes you look?Quote:
Originally Posted by Karnyboy
Also FFXIV already is "more of the same" in a over-saturated market. It would take a blind fool to not see that they essentially ripped a affliction warlock straight out of WoW, reskinned it, and called it a summoner among many other things in this game. Do you seriously think FFXIV wouldn't join that long list of P2P games having to switch to F2P if it added a cash shop? Star Wars has a bigger even more rabid fanbase than Final Fantasy does and yet that didn't save it from its inevitable failure.