Looks like a major announcement was made today.
No Free to Play on launch
Looks like a major announcement was made today.
There may be some people upset over this, and they may or may not have a right to be… But as far as I’m concerned, I’m fine with it. And I definitely like the looks of the list of improvements they’re looking to make.
Also, from Albion Admin
"There will be at least one wipe during CBT, which we plan to announce with good up front notice so it does not come as a surprise"
- The closed beta will be extended until at least 1st August 2016
- The game will not be free to play at launch
Interesting. I think it speaks well for the game but as @Mohomohommad said some people will likely be upset over it.
I really dont know about this. I doubt they can keep pople interrested for so long in closed beta.
Hope im wrong
That’s not the point of a closed beta. In fact, that misunderstanding is probably the strongest wall standing in their way.
The longer they keep the beta open and keep so many people playing in a world that will be wiped, the harder it will be to bring those numbers back at launch. No one (very very few?) are actually treating this beta as a test environment. Rather, they are playing the game as if it were launched.
I don’t play Albion but I generally don’t like the F2P model. It usually turns into things like the crown store in ESO or the cartel market it SWTOR. Turns it into a pay to win situation. I would rather pay the flat monthly fee and get all of the content.
Turns into? What is the “free to play” model if not marketplaces for in game items and perks?
While I agree with your points, that’s a problem you create for yourself when you effectively sell Alpha/Beta Access.
If you want to monetize and cash in, then you have to realize people want to get their money’s worth and enjoy the game, not pay to work for you.
Absolutely. That’s the point I was trying to make. They’ve made their testing phases into something that paying customers want significant value from.
It really boils down to what is being sold. I think most people understand that an in-game market sells things for in the game but the heated debate is over what is and isn’t okay to be sold (AKA what makes a game Pay to Win).
You look at games like league of legends or DOTA2 and the main sale items are the skins for champions or profile pictures.
You look at MMOs and the common angst within free to play is selling actual items or leveling services.
The sad part is that the consumer ends up becoming the enemy in a free to play game.
In my opinion, it’s not just the distinction of cosmetic vs. non-cosmetic. A marketplace can exist where the exchange rate of time investment and monetary investment is balanced correctly.
That is to say, if you’re cash poor and time rich you can participate at the same level and pace as someone who is cash rich and time poor.
There’s a balance there that is tricky to get right but I don’t think it’s impossible. Things like XP and credit boosts seem to work pretty well in PlanetSide 2. I think they’ve gotten it mostly right. Nothing in the marketplace can’t be obtained with time alone.
Even still, the arguments against gating content with cash are hard to justify since a subscription model essentially gates all content. In the case of SWTOR and similar games, it’s not really a traditional free to play model but rather an extended free trial. To experience the full game, you need to subscribe.
I really wish I had never dumped money into this game.
Aside from the fact that I have now given up on MMOs, almost a year after I initially bought into Albion Online, they keep making these sweeping changes to the game. How long now has this game been in alpha/beta?
“Armor system rework” is listed as one of their goals. Wasn’t the armor system just reworked 3 months ago?
The list of potential improvements suggests to me they want to focus more on the PC and get away from a mobile platform. That’s fine. But making this decision so late in the process is a bad idea. People are going to be burned out on the game by the time it finally makes it to launch, whatever or whenever that is now.
It sounds like they now want the game to even more closely resemble Ultima. But how many people are going to stick around for another year?
Edit - Someone in that thread used the term scope creep. That certainly applies.
This is a really good way to describe it. And honestly they don’t hide that fact, they say things such as “Subscribe today for full access” or something to that effect.
But in my opinion one of the best payment models around "Buy to Play"
And the best example of that in my mind is Guild Wars 2. They brought out a game with full access to content for $60 (the same cost as most AAA titles out there) and a cash shop for cosmetics and quality of life items.
And with that $60 and some revenue from the cash shop they provided regular content updates for the players.
I really hope that all or most online games switch to this model in the future.
I, personally, am glad that they are extending launch. I have been playing the game non-stop and I love it. After discussing it with other people, i knew there was more that could be improved upon. I am confident that this dev team can get the game right and I really enjoy the changes I see up on the changelog. I do agree that some people will get burnt out and not play the game during CBT or come back for wipe/big changes. Overall, I am excited to watch where this game goes. I would rather not see a game that is “lacking something” come out too early.
This is where the consumer ends up being the enemy, the gamers are divided over what is and is not okay for a company to sell. While playing EQ1, when discussions of free to play came about, a common quote to hear from PvPers was, “I don’t want to fight your wallet.”
Personally, i have seen gold selling and character selling from the first MMO I was a part of til today and it won’t ever change. If the game company doesn’t do it, a 3rd party service will. You have WoW releasing catch-up mechanics on each expansion and no one really flinches but if you started selling max level - 5 characters in most other games the dev gets crucified.
Destiny just “recently” released info on them selling character boosts and you have articles like these popping up now:
If you have catch-up methods that allow the trade of RL cash for in-game rewards there are quite a few people that start the “Pay to Win” chanting.
This all makes for some very interesting conversation though!
Star Citizen announced recently that their ship sales will continue post release. Many people started to chant that it was going “Pay to Win” even after RSI announced that the sales would be only the base game packages + starter ship, similar to what elite dangerous offers.
In a game where you already pay money for your ship…people are complaining about people paying money for a ship…
I love this model personally, you recover initial costs and build a cash shop for cosmetics / boosts. I also think it is the most ethical choice for consumers as the dev is forced into planning for this model and not going for a “Sub for release…Oh shit we didn’t make the numbers! QUICK F2P!”
Actually, this is a lot more ethical than what I believe the modern thought process behind a subscription model which is “We’ll charge a subscription until we notice player activity drop below this threshold and then we’ll reveal our F2P model!”
It started in Alpha about a year ago. A year and a half to go from Alpha to release is not particularly unreasonable.
The game is in development, and clearly stated as such. The whole point of which is so they can make changes before release. All changes are, or are directly related to (i.e. a required mechanic to have something else work properly), what they wanted to implement when they set out to make the game… And as for the people who are getting burnt out… if you can’t play through a game several times, then don’t buy games in development since that’s the whole point of it.
While some games, like DayZ and Star Citizen, are clearly taking advantage of the new “play it in development” trend and do suffer from scope creep, I think most of what is happening with Albion is people coming in and making unsubstantiated assumptions about what exactly they were buying in to.
Agreed, you explained it much better than I did.
The current (past?) trend of releasing as a subscription and then 6-12 months later flopping on the model and rushing out a F2P model seems to showcase a lack of ethics or a severe lack of market awareness.