Mogstation and New Content

[Kaethra]

Haven't you heard? The game is dying! It'll shut down in a half a year, tops. /s

Folks were saying the same thing about FFXI, back in 2006, when the game was just three years old. It had plenty of glory years left to it after that, and is in fact still chugging along, albeit as a shadow of what it once was (but still pretty darned impressive for a game showing its age as badly as it does).

You'll never have to look far on the General Forums to find folks spouting doom 'n gloom who really have no idea what they're talking about.

My favorite was when WoW came out and they said it'd kill Everquest. WoW came out in 2004, 2005 had EQ's highest subscription. Its on its like 24th expansion now.

[Felis]

Many of the Mogstation articles were from past-events that we got for free.

I'm just concerned about where the money goes; does it go to SE in general or FFXIV? If it goes directly to FFXIV then I'm ok paying for some glamours, because I can and want some of them and I'll feel better if it helps the game somehow.

moving EU servers to europe
upgrading servers for bigger inventory
moving NA servers to somewhere else
maybe more server stuff in future

Judging by the amount of cash the mogstation brings in, and the lack of noticeable difference in content quality or quantity pre cash shop and post cash shop, I reckon it goes to SE in general.

Don't just look at the stage (what you see ingame), but also to the backstage (mostly hardware stuff)

[RoseOfTheRaven]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_aliYN8hNk
Winning is subjective, for some it may be clearing the latest raid, for others it may be controlling the market boards, etc.

As I do wish that more interactive/glamour questlines were added, this comment doesn't apply to MS stuff as none of it is marketable nor tradeable (unless u want to go into losing your furniture item due to placing in public(fc) access/use housing. So it still isn't anything to be considered pay to win.

[Naunet]

I don't understand what's with the modern video-game players that defend anti-consumer practices especially on a game that started without them like ours. It doesn't helps that the game really did get more content before cash shop... both extra events and actual playable content.

Preach. Thank you for this post. I feel less alone.

[NolLacnala]

I don't understand what's with the modern video-game players that defend anti-consumer practices especially on a game that started without them like ours.

Don't weigh on them too much. This practice has been normalized for their gaming generation, and because they don't know any better, they hand wave and accept it.

[Talraen]

Don't weigh on them too much. This practice has been normalized for their gaming generation, and because they don't know any better, they hand wave and accept it.

I've been gaming since before the NES, and I have no problem with these supposedly "anti-consumer" practices. The fact is, game development budgets have gotten completely out of control, and they need to make that money somewhere. Instead of continually raising game prices, everyone went with a DLC model. At first I hated it, because it felt like I was being forced to pay for the full game, but eventually I got over that (and now I spend more on DLC than I did back then).

The idea that optional content is "anti-consumer" is just nonsense, though. It's basically a progressive tax. Instead of charging everyone more money, they get more money by allowing some people to spend far more than others. As long as they don't add anything that you're forced, gameplay-wise, to buy, I am totally fine with it. I don't care how much you love glamours, or whether that's the reason you play, it's still optional content. If they start charging for something that you essentially need to play (like F2P game stamina type stuff), I'm out. I hate free to play with a passion, not because they're charging me for a bunch of stuff, but because they're continually charging me to actually play the game*. That's not happening here, so I'm fine with it.

(*EDIT: As someone pointed out, this statement is totally ridiculous when applied to the fact that this game has a subscription. So I should clarify that the difference to me is that the subscription is a small, set amount, and doesn't change based on how or how much I play the game. But... yeah that was pretty dumb to say.)

If you're opposed to the cash shop, you have to ask yourself, would you rather they raised subscription prices? Now I think it's pretty clear they wouldn't do that, because it would be suicide in the current gaming sphere. But that's why they have a cash shop. Relying solely on cheap subscriptions you can't raise is leaving money on the table. If you begrudge them trying to make more money... well sorry, but welcome to real life. I've long since given up on railing against businesses for daring to charge me for things, and I highly recommend you do the same. You'll feel better!

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Its funny because some will say the game is bleeding pop. I find that hard to believe when I read such a post while waiting in a server queue. Won't be the first game I've experienced this in.

People point to the unofficial censuses we've had for those excuses but conveniently forget despite the sharp decline we did see back when Gordias was content, subs have seen gone up. Creator showed the largest climb since Heavenward launched. So it'll be interesting how Omega fairs as they have said the difficulty will remain the same for Savage.

[Lelila38]

Almost every game has them now because instead of uniting to show developers that we don't want such thing, we argue between ourselves and pay for them anyway.

I don't understand what's with the modern video-game players that defend anti-consumer practices especially on a game that started without them like ours. It doesn't helps that the game really did get more content before cash shop... both extra events and actual playable content.

In my opinion arguing in favor of cash shops is a disrespect to both the game and the developers, since you're basically saying that you'd rather pay than play the game's content to obtain your items.

Thank you!

[Bourne_Endeavor]

Almost every game has them now because instead of uniting to show developers that we don't want such thing, we argue between ourselves and pay for them anyway.

I remember one day when they were asked why FFXI never had a cash shop and the answer was something like "the playerbase would never accept it". The European Ragnarok Online (euRO) also stopped on very basic items (that you could easily get better in game) because the playerbase wouldn't accept what other ROs were getting.

I don't understand what's with the modern video-game players that defend anti-consumer practices especially on a game that started without them like ours. It doesn't helps that the game really did get more content before cash shop... both extra events and actual playable content.

https://ffxiv.gamerescape.com/wiki/Category:Events

3 out of 5 extra events were added before the cash shop (Lightning, Shantotto and Dragon Quest).

In my opinion arguing in favor of cash shops is a disrespect to both the game and the developers, since you're basically saying that you'd rather pay than play the game's content to obtain your items.

Because not everyone feels the same way. I, for one, have no qualms with DLC, provided it's worthwhile content. When developers have attempted to nickel and dime, people have called them out. BioWare has taken a beating for their day one DLC practices and Square Enix themselves caved to the overwhelmingly negative response to "augment my pre-order."

Another aspect is the realization and acceptance innovation isn't free. You seem to presume companies will simply eat financial losses. They won't. Stuff on the cash shop simply wouldn't exist if said shop were rejected by the community. In that same vein, if people refused to purchase DLC, game prices would skyrocket. The cost of development have increased exponentially over the years and companies will always look for new venues they can explore to recoup those costs. In 2010, Final Fantasy X's entire budget was estimated around 35 million. Nowadays, triple A titles break into the hundred million range; marketing only extends it further. We can't have it all. People want better graphics and technical advances. Well, those cost money. We're either going to pay for it through add ons or at the base cost. I prefer the former because it allows me to opt out. That moogle mount is too expensive for me? Good thing I don't have to purchase it.

[Zojha]

If they start charging for something that you essentially need to play (like F2P game stamina type stuff), I'm out. I hate free to play with a passion, not because they're charging me for a bunch of stuff, but because they're continually charging me to actually play the game. That's not happening here, so I'm fine with it.

*blinks*
So...uh... what exactly is the subscription to you?

I mean, except that you don't "essentially" need it to play, but "literally" need it to play?