Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 281
05-31-2012, 04:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baelturath
And how often did Blizzard add new things to do in content patches that were completely free? A new instance here, a new quest chain there, a new item set, whatever?
I have absolutely no clue. I don't play WoW. SoE does that next to never with its games. They do anniversary content which is in game briefly once a year, but the amount varies considerably from year to year. They also do some holiday content, but again that varies from year to year and is only up small portions of the year.

I repeat though, Everquest and especially WoW have much higher subscriber numbers and thus revenue streams than STO. That means a much larger budget for everything. They benefit from economies of scale.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 282
05-31-2012, 04:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
I have absolutely no clue. I don't play WoW. SoE does that next to never with its games. They do anniversary content which is in game briefly once a year, but the amount varies considerably from year to year. They also do some holiday content, but again that varies from year to year and is only up small portions of the year.
Well, you brought up WoW and that new content was primarily provided by for-pay expansions that come out at best once a year.

I just googled a bit and it's too effing much to even start listing here: http://www.wowwiki.com/Patches
Check out the "See also" sections and open the slots of each individual patch. Blizzard has added more things to WoW with free content patches alone than STO will ever have in total.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
I repeat though, Everquest and especially WoW have much higher subscriber numbers and thus revenue streams than STO. That means a much larger budget for everything. They benefit from economies of scale.
And the fact that STO doesn't have such a player base speaks of a series of significant mistakes that were (and are still being) made by Cryptic, Atari and PWE on both development and management level.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 283
05-31-2012, 04:24 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baelturath
Well, you brought up WoW and that new content was primarily provided by for-pay expansions that come out at best once a year.

I just googled a bit and it's too effing much to even start listing here: http://www.wowwiki.com/Patches
Check out the "See also" sections and open the slots of each individual patch. Blizzard has added more things to WoW with free content patches alone than STO will ever have in total.
If you are counting patches, then EQ adds a LOT of 'content,' but just keeping the game generally running, addressing (or attempting to address, and sometimes worsening) balance issues, etc, is not what most would consider 'content.'

(Edit: Even if they have added a significant amount of 'free' content, the game is still essentially completely sub based, only being F2P up to level 20 and that is only very recent (as of Dec of last year). That is much more restrictive a F2P model than EQ. That means they have a rather a lot more people paying just to play, and thus a much much better budget.

Quote:
And the fact that STO doesn't have such a player base speaks of a series of significant mistakes that were (and are still being) made by Cryptic, Atari and PWE on both development and management level.
Well it also speaks to available budget. It almost certainly wasn't as successful as they hoped right off the bat. After that it gets catch 22. You don't have the budget for radical improvements and can't get the budget without radical improvements or a large high risk influx of outside capital.

Lock boxes are likely an attempt at generating that influx.

From what I have read of the DDO forums, they had a very similar situation to STO, including a theoretically strong pedigree (D&D rather than Trek), and the year of content drought. They managed to borrow the money to reinvest though, and adopted a model where they sell access to most (not all but most) of their new content piecemeal. Or you can sub and get access to all of it that way.

They also have an advantage, though, of a less restrictive IP. Even the D&D mechanics were modified to better fit an MMO, and they are working with an original (or mostly orignial) setting, giving them a freer hand.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 284
05-31-2012, 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
Well it also speaks to available budget. It almost certainly wasn't as successful as they hoped right off the bat.
Let's face it though, they could have done a lot worse....
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 285
05-31-2012, 04:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by centersolace
Let's face it though, they could have done a lot worse....
Of course they could have. That doesn't change that they didn't do better. Again, what they had to work with and what they have to work with now are based on what actually happened, not on what should have or could have happened.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 286
05-31-2012, 05:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
If you are counting patches, then EQ adds a LOT of 'content,' but just keeping the game generally running, addressing (or attempting to address, and sometimes worsening) balance issues, etc, is not what most would consider 'content.'
I'm not just counting the number of patches, but also the content of those patches. For example, the patches from 1.1 to 1.12 alone added
* 2 instances
* 1 pvp arena
* 1 pvp event
* 5 worldbosses
* 2 class epic quests
* 3 battlegrounds
* 5 raid instances
* 2 pve events
* pvp honor system
* weather effects
* several talent revamps and updates
to the game in the time from Dec '04 to Aug '06.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
(Edit: Even if they have added a significant amount of 'free' content, the game is still essentially completely sub based, only being F2P up to level 20 and that is only very recent (as of Dec of last year). That is much more restrictive a F2P model than EQ. That means they have a rather a lot more people paying just to play, and thus a much much better budget.
Sure, but why do you think STO went F2P? Because the amount of content was a bad excuse for a subscription based game. WoW, ****, EQ/2 actually had enough content and features to justify spending 15$/ per month on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
Well it also speaks to available budget. It almost certainly wasn't as successful as they hoped right off the bat. After that it gets catch 22. You don't have the budget for radical improvements and can't get the budget without radical improvements or a large high risk influx of outside capital.

Lock boxes are likely an attempt at generating that influx.
That's true, sadly. But right now that's spilled milk. If it's true what we've been told about PWE's investment in Cryptic and STO there should be significant and major improvements coming up rather soon - or STO may really be a lost case for a brighter future.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
From what I have read of the DDO forums, they had a very similar situation to STO, including a theoretically strong pedigree (D&D rather than Trek), and the year of content drought. They managed to borrow the money to reinvest though, and adopted a model where they sell access to most (not all but most) of their new content piecemeal. Or you can sub and get access to all of it that way.
Tbh, I would have rather prefered STO to follow DDO's or LotRO's F2P model which actually is really F2P and also gives people more than enough reasons to keep a subscription.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimmera
They also have an advantage, though, of a less restrictive IP. Even the D&D mechanics were modified to better fit an MMO, and they are working with an original (or mostly orignial) setting, giving them a freer hand.
I think you're mistaken here. D&D is the name for the brand and the generic system. DDO takes place in Eberron, a very specific and detailed campaign setting that uses D&D to be played. You could (more or less easy) port the world of Eberron to use e.g. the mechanics from Savage Worlds or some such. The actual IP used by the game therefore is Eberron, and you haven't seen the amount of flames Turbine needed to quench on their forums over certain design decisions.
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 287
05-31-2012, 05:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baelturath
I'm not just counting the number of patches, but also the content of those patches. For example, the patches from 1.1 to 1.12 alone added
Again, budget. WoW ended up with large chunks of EQ's former sub base plus a lot more beyond that, which explains not seeing the same in EQ.

Quote:
Sure, but why do you think STO went F2P? Because the amount of content was a bad excuse for a subscription based game. WoW, ****, EQ/2 actually had enough content and features to justify spending 15$/ per month on it.
To a great extent yes, but also that a lot of the potential market were already loyal to other more established games, meaning that anything new has to be that much better to pry people away. In the case of WoW vs EQ, SoE complacency brought on by other new games having proven no competition at all plus a great number of people loyal to blizzard's RTS games made that exodus easier, but that was a noteworthy exception.

Quote:
That's true, sadly. But right now that's spilled milk. If it's true what we've been told about PWE's investment in Cryptic and STO there should be significant and major improvements coming up rather soon - or STO may really be a lost case for a brighter future.
It could well be that it was expected to be. It is unclear though how much the conversion to F2P cost, what kind of debts Cryptic had when bought out, or whether the puchase was simply overly optimistic. Without internal memos from the negotiations and a good look at Cryptic's books (or at least its unconsolodated financials) everything is speculation.

Quote:
Tbh, I would have rather prefered STO to follow DDO's or LotRO's F2P model which actually is really F2P and also gives people more than enough reasons to keep a subscription.
I agree completely and I don't see how they'll be able to avoid ending up there. It seems really unlikely that lock boxes are sustainable.

Quote:
I think you're mistaken here. D&D is the name for the brand and the generic system. DDO takes place in Eberron, a very specific and detailed campaign setting that uses D&D to be played. You could (more or less easy) port the world of Eberron to use e.g. the mechanics from Savage Worlds or some such. The actual IP used by the game therefore is Eberron, and you haven't seen the amount of flames Turbine needed to quench on their forums over certain design decisions.
I suppose, but never saw any of that when I was paying attention to it. But then I have never been in a D&D campaign where the setting was treated as anything more than an idea base, and that includes a dragonlance campaign. I know they exist, but I am pretty sure that they are fewer D&D setting fanatics than trekkers
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:51 PM.