Platform holders Sony and Microsoft are keen on the idea of console-based subscription MMOs, although there are still hurdles to overcome.
That's according to Jeff Strain, founder of Seattle-based startup studio Undead Labs, who's currently working on an as-yet unnamed zombie-based console MMO.
While obstacles remain for a subs-based MMO on consoles, Strain reckons discussions with Sony and MS are positive. "There are still hurdles to jump with both Sony and Microsoft. But people will make it much easier to jump the hurdle if people can come to the table and say 'we're making a console-only MMO from the ground-up.
"I've been talking to them for years and I think they very much want to see this. There are lots of sticking points to get through. The questions will be how billing works, how the revenue is recognized and who gets what," added Strain, telling Develop that the platform holders are still "feeling their way through the whole MMO business model".
The only MMO's that I know of that interest me are APB and The Secret World, both are allegedly coming to the 360 but so too was Champions and Conan and Huxley, so I wont hold out much hope.
this is where cash cow COD is heading, you can be sure a lot of other famous franchises will want in too.
these bastards want to fleece as much cash out us as possible. this DLC culture silently rips off the consumer. only about one out of ten does it right.
it can all be done without a subscription. they are just reinventing standard games to subscription based.
troll/goblins games are the norm this setup. but soon the flood gates will open and conventional genres will turn into MMO's. and its all just to bleed gamers dry.
this is where cash cow COD is heading, you can be sure a lot of other famous franchises will want in too.
these bastards want to fleece as much cash out us as possible. this DLC culture silently rips off the consumer. only about one out of ten does it right.
it can all be done without a subscription. they are just reinventing standard games to subscription based.
troll/goblins games are the norm this setup. but soon the flood gates will open and conventional genres will turn into MMO's. and its all just to bleed gamers dry.
I'm actually not adverse to subscription based MMO's on console.
Never played one before admittedly, but if you are going to sink hours and hours and hours into a single game, with a huge, constantly evolving persistant world, then why not pay a small fee for that. The coders are contantly updating, monitoring and working on the game for me to enjoy, so a subsciption isn't necessarily an attempt to fleece, just a means to cover the constant work that goes into the game.
However I expect the likes of Activision will 'suprise' us all by coming up with new and interesting ways to abuse such a set up, and thus their customer base. Again.
this is where cash cow COD is heading, you can be sure a lot of other famous franchises will want in too.
these bastards want to fleece as much cash out us as possible. this DLC culture silently rips off the consumer. only about one out of ten does it right.
it can all be done without a subscription. they are just reinventing standard games to subscription based.
troll/goblins games are the norm this setup. but soon the flood gates will open and conventional genres will turn into MMO's. and its all just to bleed gamers dry.
I'm with SVD on this one. I loathe the thought of subscription based gaming. I understand the arguments in favour of it for MMOs, yet the thought of MMOs suddenly becoming the main type of games released is borderline depressing. Should that day come I think that'll be around the time I hang up my keyboard & mouse/gamepad controller.
I'm actually not adverse to subscription based MMO's on console.
Never played one before admittedly, but if you are going to sink hours and hours and hours into a single game, with a huge, constantly evolving persistant world, then why not pay a small fee for that. The coders are contantly updating, monitoring and working on the game for me to enjoy, so a subsciption isn't necessarily an attempt to fleece, just a means to cover the constant work that goes into the game.
However I expect the likes of Activision will 'suprise' us all by coming up with new and interesting ways to abuse such a set up, and thus their customer base. Again.
I'm not opposed to the existence of MMOs in principle - be it on the PC or the console platforms. I am however opposed to them becoming the standard way of doing business in the gaming industry.
There was an article on CVG last year I think it was, where it was outlined just how much one could roughly expect the development and maintenance costs for WoW to be, and then compared it to the average monthly subscription multiplied by 10-11 million users. The subscriptions were more than double the expected costs.
Granted, discounts on some subscriptions, etc. will likely dilute the figures a bit but I am not convinced that it isn't possible to lower the monthly subscription fees and still make a profit while offering what should be a decent service. Sure, the cost of a monthly subscription is about what one pays for a movie ticket in some places, so if you play enough you get far more for your mone. Yet you also have to factor in costs of purchasing the installation packages and expansion packs, which I think should be substantially cheaper (if not outright free,) if you pay a monthly subscriptions.
The question seems to be "How much profit is enough"? Sadly it does seem too much to expect many companies to show some modicum of foresight in regards to fostering and growing their markets instead of laying them to waste for a quick cash in. It's got to be sustainable if it's to be in the runnings for the long term. That in itself may be part of the problem considering the relatively short attention span of the gaming market (this goes for both the companies and the customers).
I think I read that UBISOFT are turning the Clancy universe into an MMO aswell, possibily if done right I wouldnt mind paying a monthly sub for this game but a COD MMO theres not enough there, and as everyone has said their gonna milk that series to death. In general i cant wait for MMO's to finally come to consoles so many have been advertised initially as coming out; only to find a couple of years later that they've scarpped the console version, I still live in hope Huxley will eventually make to 360, and wasnt Turbine bringing one too? APB, Star trek and Star wars old republic and many more are all console casulties, lets just hope Dust 514 doesnt add to that casulty list. I have no quarms paying for an MMO if it is good enough like FFIX, LoTR, Dungeons & Dragons, Warhammer where you spend months or years playing but how I would view a FPS subscription MMO I'm not sure...but one thing I do know is I definitely want MMO's on consoles!
There is nothing wrong with MMO's infact I've spents hours on two of them before and loved it. First I played the FFXI Beta that was on the front of Xbox360 Magazine all those years ago and got hooked and I played another year once the full version came out. I then moved on to WoW and have spent 2 years on it.
MMO's are never going to be the only type of game and they will only run along side of normal games. They cost a lot of money to maintain and are quite a high risk to set up. But MMO's that work offer something that just can not be found in other games. You get dedicated game servers and almost unlimited game content.
I hate it when people that have never even played any type of MMO say that they are evil games made for evil companys to generate huge sums of money only. Thats utter s**te. If they were s**te games made only to generate cash then it would reflect in the game experence and people just would not play them.
I don't like the model of free MMO's that you pay for items because it makes for a game that is unbalanced and not a level playing field. Subscription based MMO's can be great and make for great game experences.
Back on Topic: Im sure Sony have more intrest in a good game exprence as far as MMO's are concerned then Microsoft. FFXIV is a great example of this. FFXI is a great game on the 360 and Microsoft let Square enix release it on the 360 as they needed good games early in the 360 life cycle. Now FFXIV is almost here Microsoft are throwing stupid demands at Square enix as far as server rights and royities are concerned. Sony are making no such demands and are allowing cross platform link up, something that even though MS allowed for FFXI, they wont allow for FFXIV.
Your statment is utter rubbish and you cleary have no idea what your talking about
i cant see MMO's taking off on the 360 on top of another subscription.
Too late FFXI was released very close to the 360 launch and it has thousands of users.
why cant the developers make it free? you pay for the game. why do you need to pay extra? just because its always been that way?! upkeep of servers is no excuse.
It can't be free becuase you need to pay for a team of people to do the following: *Be online at ALL times to act as GM's to help sort out any ingame problems that might arise, *Pay a different team to write content to be released on a fortnightly basis, *Pay for large scale new content to be created,tested. Like new dungeons, new bad guys, etc. Graphics must be written, Sound needs to be made, it need to be play tested and made sure that all users can play and complete the new content and that it works will the thousnads of items that exsist in the MMO world already. *A game like WoW has hundreds of servers all round the world. You need to pay for these servers, pay for their upkeep, pay to keep them somewhere, pay for people to look after them, monitor server usage and keep play levels on each server to a suitable amount. Does that really sound like something ANYONE can do for free?
an LBP affair would be alright. optional cosmetic DLC. but the core remains free for all.
You just answered your own question! LBP is paid for with users buying items. this works for a game like LBP, but a game like WoW you can not expect people to buy new swords or armour or it would ruin the equal playing field has it would just come down to who spends the most money on their charactor.
if anything up the game to £60 for entry. no need to charge monthly subs. thats just fleecage.
If you sell 2 million copys of a game and you make £120,000,000. If the game costs £20,000,000 to devlope then the the publisher will take around £45,000,000 and retailers will take around £45,000,000 too. That leaves you £10,000,000 to pay for everything I listed in the above list for the next 4/5 years. The maths just don't add up.
i cant see MMO's taking off on the 360 on top of another subscription.
why cant the developers make it free? you pay for the game. why do you need to pay extra?
just because its always been that way?!
upkeep of servers is no excuse.
an LBP affair would be alright. optional cosmetic DLC. but the core remains free for all.
if anything up the game to £60 for entry. no need to charge monthly subs. thats just fleecage.
there are free 'communities' all around. HOME, LBP, steam etc.
they are charging just because they can.
The stars must have aligned or something because yet again we are in agreement, SVD. While there are clearly millions of people whom are willing to pay subscription fees, I'm one of those people who is instantly turned off from buying a game if I find out it's subscription based. I would rather pay a full premium price up front - as you suggested - and then get access to the core of the game without added costs from then out until the end of time.
As a customer it isn't my problem how the companies cover server costs. While I, and those who share these sentiments may, or may not, be a minority, it appears that there is certainly a market for games that lead with the single player campaign. A free online community experience would be a fine addition but I won't pay for it. It strikes me as a frivolous monthly drain.
I'm loving the comments "why can't they be free?" here. What can't all games be free?
You can't compare a full MMO to LBP. I love LBP but it's just not the same experience. Granted, my main experience of MMO's comes from WoW, which I've only started playing this year but it's been my cheapest gaming year. LBP will be a lot cheaper to run than WoW, for a start the majority of content for LBP is user made. Blizzard have the expansions (which you must pay for) and some absolutely huge patches, like the one that will hopefully be coming out soon, that are probably bigger than most full games.
The subsciption fee doesn't both me, I buy less games because WoW is so big (and all MMO's should really be like that...) and it allows the servers to be monitored.
I'd hate if WoW went free but you had to pay real money for items. I can justify a subscription fee, I can't justify spending real money on a virtual item. And that is what would happen, because its by far the best way to get people to spend their money.
Voodoo said it right to be honest, no-one if forced to pay. If you don't like the idea of subscriptions then don't buy the game, there's no point whining how the game should be free, because that's just not how it is. If you don't want to pay, the game isn't for you.
Having a different opinion on the current state of affairs does not automatically render it "whining". The argument that no one is forced to buy it is a hollow one if certain standards are not upheld in the market place; given humanity's economic history I have very little faith that a market will effectively regulate itself and remain open and fair unless there's an external actor with the clout to knock some heads together on occasion (this then raises the issue of whom or what watches the watcher, but that's a debate for another time). Consider for example what you would do if there were only a few means of obtaining a good or service, and the companies producing the good or service collaborated to fix prices, delivery methods, etc. thus in effect creating monopolies and violating fair trade policies.
Now subscription based game systems do not necessarily violate these things yet nor are they they only game in town, and it is precisely in the hopes that they will not choke other forms of gaming like weeds in a flower bed that I choose to send a message to the companies that there are still customers with good money who are willing to spend it on their products just not subscription based ones. I derive satisfaction - even some measure of pleasure - from denying certain companies my money.
I do agree with Grasshopper on this. It's such a shame gaming has turned into such a rip off these days. If this shameless pilfering of our wallets continues this may be my last generation of machines I buy and I will stick to them and my retro roots in the future.
When a service is free like Psn or the P.C community I can understand maybe paying a sub to play a certain game, for funding server costs etc, but when people have already paid 40 quid for something like Xbox live that should be it. No fees, no subscriptions, no charges to play online. In the case of Xbox live I would not be pay a penny more than the cost of Live for online play, as I've already paid for the service of playing online - thats the whole point.
The only way I could possibly see any remote chance of this working would be to scrap Live altogether and pay a small sub per game so the ones you don't want to play online you wouldn't have to pay for and only pay for the ones you use at the time. Problem is, if you play a lot of different games online it would work out more costly and complicated trying to remember which games you paid for and which you didn't, and what date the subs ran out and needed renewing or not...it would just get out of hand.
Surely it would be better to just keep the service we already have in place?
If you agree with SVD's MMO's should be free comment then your mental. I'd like to direct you back to my previous statment so you can see that speaking from a maths and tech point of view its completely wrong.
Seriously. I'm confused as to when gaming became a rip off. You all talk like someones holding a gun to your head and demanding your wallet.
You do realise that there has been dlc in the PC community for years. It's known as the expansion pack. and before the net became a good way to deliver extra content they were sold on discs. for a bout half the price of regualar games, and last only a little bit longer as you'd get everything extra at once rather than drip fed to you.
s**t we've never had it better as gamers. Our hobby is finally being taken seriously as an entertainment medium, games are on average half the price they were in the 8/16bit days. Hell i rememember when Street Fighter 2 Turbo came out and it was £60.
Your whole argument about MMO's is completely redundant because as has already been said They have rediculously huge overheads, and require a hell of a lolt more man hours than any other genre of games. Also you can download most of them for free, with a free trial period so you can see what you will be paying for, if you don't like you simply cancel after your 10 days or whatever is up.
At the end of the day all of this stuff is optional, you don't have to buy any of it.
It just sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it.
with the gaming industry raking in more money than hollywood these days, it just shows how they are all ripping the consumer off!
the price of games is already high... i do understand the time it takes to develope a game can run into years on some projects and the money spent can be high however this in not always the case. Yet the price is STILL generally the same as an expensively produced title. a hollywood movie can also take years and tens (sometimes hundreds) of millions of dollars yet the price of a movie is a quater of a video game.
the subscription idea is not a good idea, people that say it is have been conditioned to think that prob because of WoW. it is a sorry state of affairs when the industry are thinking that this is the way forward for gaming, and i believe if it starts on a larger scale all games will head that way. The DLC is an ok idea because u have the option to buy or not buy, but if its subscription u will miss out on the game all together if u choose not to subscribe.
If you agree with SVD's MMO's should be free comment then your mental. I'd like to direct you back to my previous statment so you can see that speaking from a maths and tech point of view its completely wrong.
tons of content can be written in advance, unlocked from the disc or downloaded online in due course. drip feed the fuckers.
criteron busted their hump to bring fans lots of great stuff for free.
and im sure many gimps would moderate free of charge just so they feel like god, complete with badge of honour next to their name.
most people wont want to play the same game every day, effectively living a virtual life - no matter how many 'new dungeons' get created... thats for pc dorks. a subscription scheme would fall flat on its face. fleecing with DLC is the way to go on console MMO's.
all of your problems would be void on a console, or could be overcome. dont see FPS games charging subs for server maintenance, upgrades or patches. your banging on like there are no free MMO's. they dont need to be subscription based. youre one of they idiots who enjoy paying as it makes you feel part of a special club.
A couple really great MMOs would be great. But the whole concept is about getting you addicted to one game and then spending all your time and money on it. As a gamer I'd rather experience loads of different games than be tied down to one. Not that I'm against monogamy mind.
Seriously. I'm confused as to when gaming became a rip off. You all talk like someones holding a gun to your head and demanding your wallet.
You do realise that there has been dlc in the PC community for years. It's known as the expansion pack. and before the net became a good way to deliver extra content they were sold on discs. for a bout half the price of regualar games, and last only a little bit longer as you'd get everything extra at once rather than drip fed to you.
s**t we've never had it better as gamers. Our hobby is finally being taken seriously as an entertainment medium, games are on average half the price they were in the 8/16bit days. Hell i rememember when Street Fighter 2 Turbo came out and it was £60.
Your whole argument about MMO's is completely redundant because as has already been said They have rediculously huge overheads, and require a hell of a lolt more man hours than any other genre of games. Also you can download most of them for free, with a free trial period so you can see what you will be paying for, if you don't like you simply cancel after your 10 days or whatever is up.
At the end of the day all of this stuff is optional, you don't have to buy any of it.
It just sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it.
Don't forget to mention that many of those old expansion packs offered many more hours worth of gameplay than the current DLC packages do. Paying 6.51 Euros for an extra short mission that can be completed in 30 minutes or less, a chunk of meteorite that can be forged in to a special sword, a special suit of armor, two new combat abilities and a new place to trade and store your stuff is not worth 6.51 Euros when the main game (CE version) that offers 70+ hours of gameplay costs 44.95 Euros at retail level (and I got a favourable deal on that one). Yes, I'm referring to "Drago Age: Origins", a game I love and I don't rue that I purchased the DLC in this case but it is not good value for money compared to the main package!
These are for new games, currently, not existing ones except for maybe COD, but even then you only pay for it if you want to. I don't see why both forms can't exist alongside each other, you pay for what you like and want.
you want to pick up and play whenever you choose. if you go off an MMO for a while (which happens with all games) you have a sub wasting money, or you need to resubscribe when your in the mood again.
These are for new games, currently, not existing ones except for maybe COD, but even then you only pay for it if you want to. I don't see why both forms can't exist alongside each other, you pay for what you like and want.
They can as long as companies don't forget that and do not try to squeeze everything in to a can of constant micro transactions and monthly subscription fees.
with the gaming industry raking in more money than hollywood these days, it just shows how they are all ripping the consumer off!
the price of games is already high... i do understand the time it takes to develope a game can run into years on some projects and the money spent can be high however this in not always the case. Yet the price is STILL generally the same as an expensively produced title. a hollywood movie can also take years and tens (sometimes hundreds) of millions of dollars yet the price of a movie is a quater of a video game.
the subscription idea is not a good idea, people that say it is have been conditioned to think that prob because of WoW. it is a sorry state of affairs when the industry are thinking that this is the way forward for gaming, and i believe if it starts on a larger scale all games will head that way. The DLC is an ok idea because u have the option to buy or not buy, but if its subscription u will miss out on the game all together if u choose not to subscribe.
if COD went that way... GOD help us all!!!
Are you insane your basis for the games industry ripping people off is that games cost 4 times as much as a DVD. or twice as muchas a Blu ray disc. completely forgetting the fact that Movies recoup most of their money on Box office cash before DVD sales on top of that.
Also you have to think of what you are getting for your money too. A decent AAA game will give you on average 10-15 hours of enjoyment in single player, and an indefinate amount for multiplayer. compared to film which have an average length of about an hour and a half.
Doesn't seem such a rip off now.
Subscription based gaming wrks for certain genres such as MMOs as a necessary evil to avoid having to use micro transactions to pay the large overheads of the game and keep a level playing field.
As for other game genres i have a feeling that episodic gaming is going to become more frequent as it offers a great way for companies to cut down production times and make improvements as the game progresses.As well as make the initial investment in a game significantly less. only paying the full £40 if they wish to progress to the end.
@KFD although most Expansion packs were longer than your average dlc pack. they were also more expensive in the first place. Your average cost of a dlc pack is about £6-8 where as your Expansion packs are usually £15-20. Dlc is not a bad idea at all as it gives older games new legs and keeps you interested. Take the Fallout Dlc. the 5 dlc packs were each about 4 - 6 hours long depending on whether you bothered trying to do everything in them. and collectively they all cost about the same as a boxed title. But at the same time they lasted about the same length as one and also made Fallout a better game with it. Righting that god awful ending!
you want to pick up and play whenever you choose. if you go off an MMO for a while (which happens with all games) you have a sub wasting money, or you need to resubscribe when your in the mood again.
once again you engaged your mouth before your brain.
tons of content can be written in advance, unlocked from the disc or downloaded online in due course. drip feed the fuckers.
You clearly have no experence with a game like WoW. There are millions of players and many different styles of play. Some like to hunt the top items and work in organised teams, some like to complete solo missions, some like to explore, some like to genereate virtual money, some like to craft game items. The reason MMO's are consistantly updated is becuase of the huge amount of different paths you can decide to go and play. As the developer you have to keep generating content for ALL these play styles. It not just making new maps, you get feedback from the game comunity and generated the content they ask for, so you can't just drip feed it, becuase you new content is based on feedback.
criteron busted their hump to bring fans lots of great stuff for free.
Burnout is not an MMO!
and im sure many gimps would moderate free of charge just so they feel like god, complete with badge of honour next to their name.
you have no idea what a GM does do you?! You are not moderating the game to make sure people dont abuse people. its about having access to peoples data and sorting out in-game problems like instances not starting, or being in an area where you are stuck and can not progress any more. Its about being able to access the games servers and solve problems, the game makers are not just going to let anyone be a GM.
most people wont want to play the same game every day, effectively living a virtual life - no matter how many 'new dungeons' get created... thats for pc dorks. a subscription scheme would fall flat on its face. fleecing with DLC is the way to go on console MMO's.
wrong again. check a wow rankings site and you'll find hundrends and thousands of people that play hardcore every single day. And you are calling 360 players dorks? When i used to play FFXI I knew lots of people that played everyday its about the game, not the system you play it on.
all of your problems would be void on a console, or could be overcome. dont see FPS games charging subs for server maintenance, upgrades or patches. your banging on lik thre are no free MMO's.
What f**king FPS MMO's? A Masive Mulitplayer onlinegame. Not f**king 64 players a matchy. 10,000 players is MMO, not f**king farcry! You don't even know what an MMO is. FPS games are online shooters not MMO's. Your a f**king idiot. Also how is an MMO going to be any different on a console to a PC. FFXIV is going next year to be out on PS3 and PC the PS3 version will be almost the same as the PC version. If you know how they could make it different just becuase its on a Playstation why noty let us or square/enix know becuase I'm sure they'll love to hear!
@KFD although most Expansion packs were longer than your average dlc pack. they were also more expensive in the first place. Your average cost of a dlc pack is about £6-8 where as your Expansion packs are usually £15-20. Dlc is not a bad idea at all as it gives older games new legs and keeps you interested. Take the Fallout Dlc. the 5 dlc packs were each about 4 - 6 hours long depending on whether you bothered trying to do everything in them. and collectively they all cost about the same as a boxed title. But at the same time they lasted about the same length as one and also made Fallout a better game with it. Righting that god awful ending!
The "FO3" example is fair enough although personally I didn't bother buying any of its DLC. It took a redoubled effort just to complete the main game and the vast majority of the side-quests. I don't anticipate going back any time soon, if ever. If all DLC was of that length and didn't release at the same time as the main game (indicating it was created at the same time and could thus have been in the main package itself) then I'd be okay with it. Also, not releasing DLC at the same time as the main game if it's already ready to ship in order to avoid falling in the same drawer as the above fails.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
