Final Fantasy XIV article in MCV

[Tupsi]

If you want to latch onto false logic, I can't stop you. But I sincerely hope Yoshida and the development staff utilize better wisdom when concerning the future of this game than what you're expressing.

It's kind of funny how you throw away someone's point but expect people to care for your point at the same time.

[Jennestia]

If you want to latch onto false logic, I can't stop you. But I sincerely hope Yoshida and the development staff utilize better wisdom when concerning the future of this game than what you're expressing.

First off, every single character in League of Legends is purchasable by in-game currency.

Not at the time I played (earlier this year), it was either "In-game currency for an inflated price" or "Our Cashshop currency for a very cheap price."

And the major difference between Guild Wars 2, and the other games is the fact that the model STARTS free to play bypassing the whole concern for the 'rise to folp' issue on companies who built the game reliant on subscriptions. (Yet failed even with the budget you think made these games better.)

They didn't fail due to the subscription fee -- they failed by showing the lack of capacity to back it up -- a capacity that SE has proven with FFXI despite popular belief seeing as it's a successful FF time and financially successful.

So yes, we've been here before. They're doing better than FFXIV

Silkroad:R is doing better than FFXIV, we all know how badly XIV suffered due to it's launch and rushed nature, so it's kind of pointless to say an MMO is doing better than XIV when we all know of XIV's circumstances.

Do you think FFXIV will survive as a subscription model when games with superior numbers to FFXI are switching over?

If sub numbers is the only mark for success in your opinion, no it won't survive -- however a game that's fun to play and makes the company money? It will survive just like FFXI, did you happen to catch the recent report about how it made them a very large amount of money even with "low sub" numbers?

This sort of revival is the greatest challenge any company in this genre has ever had. You're going to have to sallow the fact that F2P is possible in this game's future if it doesn't have a monumental success. You can disagree on whether or not it will be better for the game overall - or the direction the genre is taking. But trying to embrace inane catchphrases of aged and outdated wisdom as your impenetrable shield is just willful ignorance.

Showing ignorance would be stating that P2P doesn't work and F2P is the real key to success, wouldn't it? You're only looking at one side when I can look at both sides and see that F2P isn't the magical fix you're making it out to be.

[Starlord]

Diddn't you know, Starlord?

I'm ALWAYS the Devil's Advocate.

You guys haven't asked me whether or not I want FFXIV to come free to play yet. (Hint: It begins with "Fu", and ends with "ck NO!")

Well, that's good to hear, and FFXIV: ARR doesn't need over a million subs to be A Successful MMO. if it can get to 250k subs or even 200k subs this game will be consider " Successful" in its own way. Just like FFXI was, and I wouldn't mind that FFXI was the best MMO I have ever played ( better than Wow to me) and it had less subs but still 1 of the best MMOs out there and still is ( I just moved on from it, because of FFXIV =)). Uniqueness my friends Uniqueness!

[Hyrist]

When the point is based off of a false assumption and not evidence, then it should be thrown away, Tupsi.

They're trying to equate the quality to the product to the expense on the customer which is false logic.

The quality of a product is based on the expense to the person selling the product, and isn't always the case. More often or not, the additional cost gets passed on to the customer - which provides the basis for that false logic, but that does not make the rule true.

Take, for example car tires. Buying them at the dealership and paying more, does not mean you're getting the better quality tire than if you bought that tire from a tire-shop, as a dealership has to mark-up the price of a tire to make any sort of profit from it, regardless if they already had it in stock or not.

Same thing for Synthetic Oil. The dealership's cost more and is NOT necessarily better than if you brought in your own at less.

And then there's faulty product. Lets go back to gaming. Rift, Aion, SWTOR, all spent tons of money trying to create a better product, and, to many, they did not feel as if they got their money's worth on the product. These were subscription based games of the same model and superior production value than FFXIV.

Heck, did WE get what we paid for in FFXIV yet? That alone should be evidence to the contrary of such a broad and blanketed statement. It's an absolute statement, which are more often false then they are true.

[Starlord]

Heck, did WE get what we paid for in FFXIV yet? That alone should be evidence to the contrary of such a broad and blanketed statement. It's an absolute statement, which are more often false then they are true.

One thing I have to say to this: " Legacy Status= 5 dollar Discount/mo" 15-10=5 =) I think we get what we paid for in the long run.

12*5= 60 dollar Savings a Year ( not including Advanced Purchase plans)

[Tupsi]

When the point is based off of a false assumption and not evidence, then it should be thrown away, Tupsi.

I've seen you throw away a lot of people's points that went against your personal belief though...

Heck, did WE get what we paid for in FFXIV yet? That alone should be evidence to the contrary of such a broad and blanketed statement. It's an absolute statement, which are more often false then they are true.

I have -- I've gotten to play another MMO with my boyfriend and we've played a lot of F2P MMOs so it's not that her statement was incorrect, it's that in general a lot of F2P MMOs tend to be lower quality, so it's a two way street, F2P also tend to be low quality more so than high quality.

[Hyrist]

Not at the time I played (earlier this year), it was either "In-game currency for an inflated price" or "Our Cashshop currency for a very cheap price."

A critisim I share, but a moot point. Whether you buy it with cash or with game currency dosen't make the champion any more or less superior.

Imagine if you could buy DLC packs for your favorite Single Player RPGs off of in game Gold, but the amount of gold was exorbitantly high. Some would still do it the slow way and save money, others, would pay for it the old fashioned way. Neither way is superior to another, neither have an advantage over another.

Free weeks further offset this for LoL.

They didn't fail due to the subscription fee -- they failed by showing the lack of capacity to back it up --

Well I guess the players didn't get what they paid for now, did they?

a capacity that SE has proven with FFXI despite popular belief seeing as it's a successful FF time and financially successful.

FFXI was also dirt cheap to make and maintain, comparatively. They also intentionally drew out content from expansions to the point they were making 3 to 4 times the amount they would have if the content was simply DLC.

If sub numbers is the only mark for success in your opinion, no it won't survive -- however a game that's fun to play and makes the company money? It will survive just like FFXI, did you happen to catch the recent report about how it made them a very large amount of money even with "low sub" numbers?

Yes, but you neglected the part where it was an inexpensive game to maintain to begin with. WoW had a similar budget, maintained and grew its superscription numbers to a factor of twenty over FFXI's peak numbers. If you were a business person, which path would you chose?

Showing ignorance would be stating that P2P doesn't work and F2P is the real key to success, wouldn't it? You're only looking at one side when I can look at both sides and see that F2P isn't the magical fix you're making it out to be.

Don't put words in my mouth. I stated that it was an option that should not be removed off the table given the market trends, and that time would be the ultimate judge on whether or not FFXIV can maintain a subscription model. NOT that it would be a magical fix to the game's financial troubles.

Hell, SE might even swallow the fact that this game will be in the red for the majority of its lifetime, that is not our call to make nor our values to work with. I'm merely stating that the knee-jerk hatred reaction to Free to Play is a bad bias to have. (Free to Play =| Buy to Win) and that subscription models are a prohibitive barrier for entry to many.

Sure, you can afford 1-2 subscriptions a month, but that's about it. You tack on a third and you're talking $30-$45 a month going out the window. Someone is going to drop in that situation.

Meanwhile, SWTOR, Diablo III, Aion, - they're still installed in my computer, still active account (Well, SWTOR will be when it goes free).

Can't say that about FFXI.

I'm not the only one that thinks that way - its a trend that developers have been considering for a while now.

I don't mind the subscription fee. I like the idea that I can clearly budget for what I'm getting. But I cannot shake the doubt that FFXIV's cost is going to push it out of the subscription model unless it can pull and hold a large subscription base. Larger than FFXI's.

Well, that's good to hear, and FFXIV: ARR doesn't need over a million subs to be A Successful MMO. if it can get to 250k subs or even 200k subs this game will be consider " Successful" in its own way. Just like FFXI was, and I wouldn't mind that FFXI was the best MMO I have ever played ( better than Wow to me) and it had less subs but still 1 of the best MMOs out there and still is ( I just moved on from it, because of FFXIV =)). Uniqueness my friends Uniqueness!

I loves me a unique game, I won't lie.

But I have a feeling it's going to take a lot more than 250k subs to keep FFXIV on its feet given how much effort has been put into it.

China Subscriptions might help out a bit with that, but given so many different games are pulling away from the Subscription model now, even that might not be enough in the long haul.

We'll see. I'm really hoping A Realm Reborn becomes a triumphant story about a company realizing it's mistake and producing a product worthy of redeeming the company's souring reputation.

- still preparing myself emotionally for that not happening, however.

[Hyrist]

I've seen you throw away a lot of people's points that went against your personal belief though...

Disagreeing with people's points is not throwing them away. The only ones that get thrown away flatly are ones that express absolutes - not the ones that disagree with my own views.

All of this is simply speculation and can be disregarded as such as a whole, including my own views. Don't presume any differently when conversing with me.

I have -- I've gotten to play another MMO with my boyfriend and we've played a lot of F2P MMOs so it's not that her statement was incorrect, it's that in general a lot of F2P MMOs tend to be lower quality, so it's a two way street, F2P also tend to be low quality more so than high quality.

Actually, what you said, and what she said, is completely different.

You said "F2P Also tend to be lower quality more so than higher quality."

She said, and I quote:

As starlord said and no one can argue this - you get what you pay for, this is a true saying in not only gaming, but life in general.

Which is an absolutism statement and thus fundamentally flawed - I having already cited examples to the contrary on both fronts.

You don't argue in absolute terms, and expect such a stance to be respected. It just doesn't work. It is ignorant and breeds further ignorance. For every rule, there are an innumerable amount of exceptions.

Mass Effect 3 ended the assumption that games were unchangeable on release. (For a second time, mind you, there was a smaller precedent for that, anyone else care to tell?)

FFXIV is making one right now about failed MMOs and them being doomed to death and obscurity.

Guild Wars 2 is also poised to break a few standards of their own, particularly about starting out with a subscription model.

Do you understand why I reject the concept now? I'm not opposed to caution when it comes to the Free to Play model. I'm opposed to the absolute that every Free to lay model must suck compared to subscription models because "You get what you pay for."

It's just not true.

[Laraul]

I have -- I've gotten to play another MMO with my boyfriend and we've played a lot of F2P MMOs so it's not that her statement was incorrect, it's that in general a lot of F2P MMOs tend to be lower quality, so it's a two way street, F2P also tend to be low quality more so than high quality.

A lot of MMOs in general are of low quality when released. Has nothing to do on the payment model. Matrix Online was P2P. So was Phantasy Star Universe. Etc. You also point out that you have played "a lot of F2P MMOs." A lot more than the one other you did with w/ your boyfriend. Would you have played these Free MMO's if you had to agree to a monthly fee after the first 30 days? Probably not.

[Starlord]

A lot of MMOs in general are of low quality when released. Has nothing to do on the payment model. Matrix Online was P2P. So was Phantasy Star Universe. Etc. You also point out that you have played "a lot of F2P MMOs." A lot more than the one other you did with w/ your boyfriend. Would you have played these Free MMO's if you had to agree to a monthly fee after the first 30 days? Probably not.

If Any-game that's F2P Switched to P2P, that game has the "Opportunity" get Regular updates, Less Annoying people, more bug fixes etc. F2P MMOs have a limit after a certain point you hit a break wall. That's how I see it with my experience with them.. and I never can play a F2P MMO because of that.

That's just my opinion though :P.