Any chance of making new TLP a none krono access?

Creating an atmosphere that the players desperately want..

VS

DBG losing out on tens of thousands of dollars?

I think we know what the answer is going to be.

I really enjoy reading posts like this. Everyone suddenly has a PhD in financial analysis and administrative business management when threads like this are open.

says history.

it's the 3rd set of TLP servers. History showed us that population on those servers decline rapidly as new expansions comes out... with next to no new players joining after PoP or GoD. You can already see the trend.



Where we are now? definatly not as big as on release day... i'm not see'ing those 8-9 instances of guk or OoT, those 5-6 instances of Sol A or mistmoore... even the 200 players sitting in the planes dosen't make up for the lack of players in sub-50 zones. However, unlike Daybreak likely planned ( a servers that would require next to no work), the TLP servers have been one big whiny bunch of crybabies and between the queue system ( who's been useless after week 3), the initial lvl 50 bug on release day, the various instances, boss modification, pet modification, respawn changes, fixing old quests, the mysterious kunark launch on Lockjaw, guide program reimplentation ( and their enforcement on TLP rotation when there's next to no GM available server-wide)... yeah. TLP required next to no work.

sure, some will come back when kunark launch. get 60.... play for a little bit at max level, drop out again....

Really? Explain how next to no work was required for a TLP. You seem like a genius thus far, so shouldn't be too hard.

Sorry, my degree is in network security, but I did have to take several accounting courses.

Reading comprehension, I can point you to a few books on it. He clearly said that they expected to put up a new TLP that heavily used their existing code and didn't require a lot of extra work. Since they've already launched four progression servers, there should have been no work to it. Instead, they got the ultra-entitled group of whiners that they didn't expect, and they've required more work than expected to keep them happy/somewhat quiet.

Lets see.....

Everquest started as a subscription model and for a while this worked.
UO, WoW and many others did the same thing and it worked.
Then WoW, Diablo 3, and others introduced marketplaces where you can pay for cool or pay for ease or pay to win.
Everquest makes the Station Cash and the Marketplace and it worked.
With a marketplace bringing in revenue, a free to play model was thought up.
A larger player base was brought in due to the free aspect all able to purchase stuff in the marketplaces.
WoW and many (I would say most) use this same model.
Gold accounts for those wanting the full experiences. (can buy stuff in the store)
Silver accounts for those just wanting to see, explore, play, etc etc. (can buy stuff in the store)

So...

If live servers can make money via a station store marketplace as well as gold accounts, and TLP servers can make money via ONLY Gold accounts and station store marketplace.....

then....

How the heck do you think a server that only receives revenue from one stream, gold accounts, is going to be a money maker? Even if the server could bring in enough revenue to cover its over head via subs, ask yourself is it worth the effort to just break even (in a company perspective)?

Talking about revenue etc... without a single figure from DBG priceless.
How much does DBG spend on a single server since you happened to forget to include that in this detailed cost breakdown.

So he agrees with me.

Whiners whining about whiners. Don't you have a thread in the vet forum to whine about whiners in? Such is the circle of life.

I do not state figures on spending as I cannot possibly know since I am not part of their financial team.
I only stated revenue streams. and 3 generally better than 2 and 2 is generally better than 1 etc etc etc.
If the amount that a sub based only special server could bring in is high enough to cover over head as well as bring in substantial profits, then I cannot see why they wouldn't do it.

But, if you had read my post correctly, I only speculate on revenue with my limited information as I detailed with trends of not just Everquest but many games and platforms. Based on trends, it would appear that the marketplace model makes a substantial amount of profit. If it didn't then why would the continue to use a free to play model with an ever increasing markplace foot print and a more expansive array of items and services?

There you go... Pretty much limited = no info.
How do I know 1/10th of revenue stream isn't enough? I don't hence I don't speculate and call it limited information.

no info = no info
limited info =/= no info
limited info allows for some deductive reasoning and thought provoking debates
I don't know if 1/10th of the revenue stream isn't enough, but based on everquest trends of the past and the recent change of command to DBG, it would seem as though it is not enough.

But what I do know for a fact is, company's are looking to make money, the more the better for them. And if krono's and markplaces make them money, I do not see why they would remove it. I cannot fathom a company with the track record that Everquest has, to become altruistic and start focusing on entertainment of the die hard classic players above profit.

You know companies are looking to make money? Amazing deduction.
Of course you or I can't see a reason they would remove it as right now it's just all guess work as is the case when you look at 1% of a 100% picture.

EQ's track record was doomed the day they thought "instancing" would not touch their sub base back in 2003 - 2005 at the height of their sub base. In addition to a host of other factors...

Their current goal(s) might look like this.... just a guess from myself.

• Can we build EQ subs...
• What alternatives can we come up with to do that...
• How can we raise the ARPU of free players / subs
• Can we test any alternative systems based on our data to raise revenue.

Let's stop stating facts based on conjecture and the 1% of the total picture we have.

I suppose that you could create an interface where the player couldn't access or click a Krono on that particular server. That would serve to prevent trading in Krono if the players couldn't see them there. I suspect that would bring back RMT ripoffs with a vengeance though

Since when did I state a fact based on a conjecture?

Krono's = Subs
What other alternative to more subs is there, beyond new/retained/returning?
ARPU ... maybe higher sub rates? (i cant see this ever happening) maybe more marketplace items/services.
Everquest has been gutted after the acquisition from Columbus Nova, an investment company, which re branded/named SOE as DBG. With less than a year at the reigns, it would be foolish business wise to experiment with risky ventures looking for alternate systems. (I have not see any old or new games trying out new systems either)

my sarcasm wasn't obvious enough?

Sheldon cooper is better than this...

I am sure many of them stayed at a holiday inn express............

You know, after doing some research and checking I was reminded that the original Stormhammer server quickly became THE powerleveling and RMT/Ebay server of EQ