Where the whales live - monetization in PS2

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by sagolsun, Jan 2, 2015.

  1. Xasapis

    I'm already paying for something consumable. In fact I'm paying for two of them:
    • Membership subscription
    • 6 month boosts
    Anything else and it becomes greed, the kind that will drive me away from the game for good. I refuse to buy any Cryptic games for being greedy bastards and I refuse to play the Zenimax MMO for the same reason. I've already gave SOE three times what I would give to a subscription based mmo, I'm not giving them any more. If they try to force it upon me, like this is some ****** facebook cash grab game, I will merely pack my bags and never touch any SOE game ever again.
  2. TheFamilyGhost

    You oughta look up the definition of meta-game.

    Meta-games are not made by devs. They are created by players.
  3. JustBoo

    And what makes you think that? Can you provide any evidence at all that proves that?

    If we deal with facts and not wishes, SOE is clearly meandering and flailing about and are now using stale failed methods from other MMO's. Examples: Look into LOTRO (Lord of the Rings Online) and Rift. They are both in big trouble and PlanetSide2 is headed down *exactly* the same path because they are now using the same failed monetization methods those chowder heads used.

    SOE are so behind the curve of knowledge in F2P it's laughable. The OP knows more about it than they do.
  4. Superman_X

    People seem to be making very odd, and unsound statements. I am not sure why. Let me explain some of the points:

    First, this system (implants) is not designed to make money. Sure they are monetizing it, but the system was clearly not designed for monetization... it just had it added after the fact. If they wanted to monetize, they would have built the system to drop implants all the time, but have them run out just as fast. The faster turnaround would result the constant use of implants, with there always being a slight shortfall that they could monetize. The current system encourages people to not use them for long periods, and to save them up for when they 'need' them... which is terrible for monetization.

    Second, this system is not good whale bait. It doesn't have a good impulse buy value. It is limited in its purchases. It does not add to prestige or gameplay. It is not something you can share with your friends/guild. It has nowhere near the attraction value to whales that things like vanity items do. It is actually much more likely to be used by the intermittent cash shop (vs sub) spender. They would find this affordable (as you don't need to buy often) and that it fits intermittent play, with long break periods.

    I see a lot of this as raging against straw men... with little consideration of the actual facts.
  5. JustBoo

    And here we have the trending example of a "customer" who knows more about a business segment than does the company we are all "buying" the product from. Welcome to the 21st Century.
  6. JustBoo

    :confused: What a strange statement since the guy who RUNS SOE said they are going to make money from them, you know, monetize them. You are literally double-speaking there guy. "This color is blue... but it's not blue." Um, what? Kind of invalidates the rest of what you write. Scarry.

    Yep, after reading this post I know *exactly* what you mean.
  7. GhostAvatar

    There biggest problem is they have removed to much of the retention aspect within the game to make it sustainable. Continent and base capture has less meaning now than it ever has throughout the development of the game. It has the core nailed down with 4 min base caps, but that is just rinse and repeat as you move onto the next base. There is no depth beyond that anymore. Instead they tried to replace that with the grind that is directives. Which fails at any kind of long term retention, especially once they are completed.
  8. NoctD

    Not really - people just haven't made a big stink about it, but they did silly things like removing the non-member passive cert gain, and a true whale is able to progress at least 3x faster than a free to play player, which is a pretty sizable advantage.

    There are whales out there getting close to 1000 SPM, where the average F2P guy is going to struggle to even get to 200 SPM. Double the progression rate is about the limits of more reasonable F2P type games offer.

    They've just disguised it better previously - implants are a total in your face P2W type scheme. Even the directives are skewed towards generating more sales, ie. P2W, cause you can't do some of those without forking out $$$.
  9. Crashsplash

    Is it really? Wouldn't 'losses' due to write offs be down to discontinued games. Money spent on H1Z1 and EQ:N would be considered investments and costs but not as a loss in themselves.
  10. Crashsplash

    Good post and a good suggestion to SOE at the end too.

    Yep, I have been wanting that 'superfan' game and I'd be willing to pay for it but I haven't seen any suggestions on how it can be monetised. After all I've got all the camos and bling I'd every want and the same for weapons too and, there's still station cash to spare if needed. I want that game but without being able to monetise it what incentive to SOE have to create it?

    I've spent a lot on ps2 over a fairly short period however I did spend more overall on ps1 subscriptions, eight years worth or so.
  11. Crashsplash

    of course and we know what he means.
  12. Whatupwidat

    No - can you offer evidence to the contrary?

    Facts not wishes...and yet you offer nothing but unsubstanciated secondary anecdotes as your edidence.


    Yes, clearly - that's why the game is still online :rolleyes:
  13. uhlan

    The problem with SOE's monetization model is that it is failing, or nearly so because of complete lack of support.

    SOE, imho, decided long ago that the Player Studio would carry the game in that regard as if on auto-pilot.

    However, the troubles with allowing internationally created content for so long, the lack of any products other than a bunch of helmets, decals and a few vehicle odds and ends are effectively killing their only cash cow.

    This game is only as deep as the textures you pay for, unfortunately.

    It's all about dropping in, farming your peas in your fancy combat pajamas and logging off.

    I firmly believe there was never anything else to it.

    Higby even said recently on twitter he wanted his next game to have more depth and a reason for being.

    His comment, by extension, leads me to believe he knows PS2 doesn't have it and maybe was never intended to have it.

    Every argument we make about the failures of the game, failure of the devs at implementation, or the lack of "effective" monetization precludes the fact that, maybe, just maybe, the product we see is all there was ever meant to be.

    The only conclusion I can make is that it really is the "Farmville" of all FPS's. Nothing more than a series of meaningless, manipulable stats, and ribbons earned for doing "X" so many times.

    It is only the failure of their chosen monetization model and the desperation surrounding that failure that is causing them to try and find other sources (implants) to stretch the wallets of their player base. And it comes off as a bit under-handed.

    I really want to think I'm completely out-to-lunch here, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark.
  14. Crashsplash

    No Higby said he wanted a game with more 'lore' lore doesn't provide any depth to the game, at most it provides context whereas depth is within the game mechanics itself.
  15. Degenatron

    I don't think you get what I'm saying. The model, based on what the OP presented, would mean that SOE pulls the plug on some of the services that are free, and give them only to players like you and I. Subscribers would be the only ones with access the stats tracking, leaderboards, Outfit creation, comm channel, and Platoon leadership.

    That would be a huge change that took away many things the free player take for granted and put them behind the subscription pay-wall. It wouldn't effect subscribers in the least. But it would alienate a large portion of the player-base. It also means cutting off websites like Dasnfall from the stats api, so that SOE can monopolize and monetize them.

    That's the alternative to things like "the implant system". Which is the lesser of two evils? I don't know. What I do know is that if Planetside was making the expected profits, we wouldn't be talking about this. I'm sure this is not the road the dev team wants to go down, but what choice do they have? There are many who will say "just make the game better", but that's bull****. That's pure investment with no guarantee of return. Just because there are fewer bugs and smoother frame rates doesn't mean players are going to turn around and buy a camo they don't need or want. There has to be some kind of mechanism that either pushes people to subscribe or nickel & dimes them over time. Otherwise, the game is not self-sustaining and will run out of operational capital.
  16. Degenatron

    Tell me, what game -besides online gambling for real money- isn't described by that statement?

    Why is Planetside always held to a higher standard than every other FPS?
  17. Superman_X

    Of course the are going to make money off of the sale of implants. They also make money off items, vanity items, and monthly subs. Does that mean that they added all of the related items (guns etc) simply to make money? Or rather (as I stated) that they were part of the game development, and that they added monetization after. The only system that was truly added for monetization was the vanity items and Player Studio.
  18. Crashsplash

    There's one possibility and that to look on those high level players as gamesmakers to coin a phrase. That is to keep the of lower level players spending money of the cossies and weaps they need to higher level players to exist to be the platoon leaders and continent commanders and empire commanders and so on.

    I don't believe it will work without a lot more investment but it's a possible justification for trying to keep the higher level player (who don't need to spend) around.

    another alternative is to differentiate based on BR rank, e.g. if you're higher than, say BR75 you can't hear and outfit or platoon or squad chat and can't place waypoints or beacons unless you purchase {something cheap}.
  19. Crashsplash

  20. Degenatron

    Nope. Try again.