PDA

View Full Version : Trackmania vs. D3 vs. HGL


Brother Laz
12-10-2008, 04:42
The online racing game Trackmania has a lot to teach game developers in terms of what is an acceptable fee for online play.

You can get the free game Trackmania Nations Forever. It is a full game with all options and one environment - which is usually enough for anyone thanks to the track editor. If you buy Trackmania United Forever, you get six more environments and you can play on the same servers as the Nations people plus your own United servers, which hardly even exist.

So you are effectively paying €30 for a bunch of useless environments which no one plays, the ability to download (or make) a custom car, and an ingame avatar. That's it! Yet people buy the full game despite being well aware of the above.

Why? Because Nations Forever is a complete game. It is complete and fun to play. And if you really are a fan and you spend a lot of time online, you may want to buy the boxed game and get yourself a fancy car.

......

Of course, Trackmania has much lower production values than D3 and going with the free game model would be stupid for Blizzard. Just assume that €30 is essentially a multiplayer premium fee and that the standard Blizzard-grade game costs €50 instead of €0.

The point remains: people are willing to pay quite a premium for not much of a benefit if they feel like it's their own choice to do it and they actually want the benefit of their own free will.

......

Hellgate London failed due in large part to the subscription system. Again, you didn't get much in terms of extra content for your money - you got more than Trackmania, but at a higher final price tag because it had a monthly fee.

So what went wrong? Subscribers got the GOOD STUFF. The new Stonehenge area was tiny, but it had the best loot and experience. If you didn't subscribe, you got a microscopic stash and no respecs.

That wasn't a matter of buying a subscription because you liked the game, because there wasn't much to like about being left behind and forced to struggle with UI limitations unless you paid up.

London burned.

......

Morals:

- Make the game worth playing if you don't subscribe. Allow people to have fun, be competitive, win races-- I mean, get good items, and then when they are addicted they will seek out the additional paid content by themselves.

I'm sure if Trackmania made the paid United cars faster than the Nations ones, it would have failed badly because then you would be forced to upgrade if you wanted to play to win.

If people like the free multiplayer, they'll gladly pay a lot for extra options and they'll love the options. And as a company, you'll be able to charge €30 for very little content - easy money, that.

- A single upfront payment is more attractive than a monthly fee. It is much better to pay €30 once than €10 per month, because eventually when you play less or find something else to do for a month or two you'll 'LOSE' the benefits and this may be the trigger to quit the game entirely.

Also, it relieves players from having to make the value calculation every month - 'Is that Ferrari really worth my €10? Is it still worth my €10? How about this month?'.

- Even if you think a monthly fee is not too expensive, a lot of other people do. Without the free online option, Trackmania would have been a failure.

......

So my proposal for a paid b.net 2.0 would be:
* Full game functionality in terms of gameplay mechanics so people who buy the box and go online without paying extra are competitive so they actually keep playing, and so you don't lose box sales.

* Desirable but non-critical 'vanity' content (ingame and forum avatar, additional character faces/hair/skin colours, customisable armor graphics [colour, additional spikes and glows and stuff], guilds, character transfers, a website to trade items when you're not playing, 'lore quests' that explore the world of Sanctuary but don't necessarily yield character improvements, perhaps high resolution textures!) would cost an upfront fee.

* To actually bring in enough income to consider this model, this fee would be quite expensive. The fans will pay a fortune for an avatar, armor spikes or a package of lore quests.


Ps. If you think people should cowboy up and pay, remember: every player who goes to find another game that is free to play monthly means fewer games on b.net means a deader multiplayer world means less enjoyment for you.

Omikron8
12-10-2008, 04:59
the problem is that those who pay won't be satisfied with just "vanity items", the attitude shown daily on the official Hellgate forums (before flagship fell apart) proved this very clearly

the question from those people was simply "if i pay for a subscription or microtransaction WHY can't i be superior compared to the free player ? i deserve it because i pay"

it's similar to how pvp used to be in WoW, people would spend many hours a day on it and say "where's my reward ? why can't i be competitive compared to those doing pve content ?" and blizzard changed the system to make pvp gear rewards competitive to pve rewards

if stable secure (minimal cheating) multiplayer RPG servers cannot exist without a hefty regular mandatory fees (whether from microtransactions or regular fees) then it seems the ideal of a "new diablo 2" won't ever happen (yes i know sacred 2 has free servers but there's always a catch somewhere), unfortunately it may be that the battle.net we have had until now was just an anomaly in the videogame industry universe and we have to realize that multiplayer RPG won't exist without some kind of fees

if anyone can construct a system that is fair to all then i guess blizzavision would be that company

Brother Laz
12-10-2008, 15:53
the question from those people was simply "if i pay for a subscription or microtransaction WHY can't i be superior compared to the free player ? i deserve it because i pay"

The answer should be 'because if new players are not competitive they won't enjoy their stay in a game that is about becoming the strongest, and therefore won't even switch to the paid plan because they hated the free plan'.

it's similar to how pvp used to be in WoW, people would spend many hours a day on it and say "where's my reward ? why can't i be competitive compared to those doing pve content ?" and blizzard changed the system to make pvp gear rewards competitive to pve rewards

Yeah, now imagine you could pay €20/mo extra and get access to tier 15 raid gear and season 49102310 PvP gear that outclasses everything else. Are you going to enjoy grinding for your regular PvP gear? Don't think so because you're still going to suck in comparison. So why bother playing the game without the €30/mo plan if you can't succeed at the game goals?

You don't want to tell the players to 'pay up or get out'. They'll probably get out and then you have nothing.

if stable secure (minimal cheating) multiplayer RPG servers cannot exist without a hefty regular mandatory fees (whether from microtransactions or regular fees) then it seems the ideal of a "new diablo 2" won't ever happen

Server load will be only slightly higher than before (destructibles) because it is still pretty much a flat plane 2D game (eg. you can't jump or shoot over enemies). At the same time, bandwidth and servers are much cheaper than in 2000. So the running costs are actually a lot lower than D2.

As for cheat prevention, you're supposed to block cheating by designing the game properly, not by fighting a futile war against cheaters. It doesn't cost anything to prevent duping, if the game is designed in such a way that a situation where items may get duped does not arise.

It doesn't cost anything to ban botters if the levels are sufficiently random that bots do not succeed, or even better, if you don't put in incredibly rare and incredibly overpowered gear that is otherwise impossible to obtain and gives a lot of incentive to develop a bot.

The reason the D2 economy is down the crapper is not because the servers are free, but because crashing the server allowed you to dupe and because runes do not have a checksum.

unfortunately it may be that the battle.net we have had until now was just an anomaly in the videogame industry universe and we have to realize that multiplayer RPG won't exist without some kind of fees

Hah! What is actually going to happen is that people will just not get those games or even stop gaming altogether. And this may not be what we want. 10K people paying a monthly fee bring in more money than 100K people playing online for free. But from the players' point of view, 90K people are no longer playing and 10K people are paying a lot more to be part of a much smaller community - and the community is the whole point of a multiplayer game, so the value of the game goes down.

Is this progress?

Omikron8
12-10-2008, 17:46
i was just trying to play devil's advocate in regards to your OP, i agree with most of your answers but the attitude of players in MMOs or two-tier games (microtransactions or hellgate with sub system) unfortunately seems to disagree

xtravaller
13-10-2008, 20:37
The online racing game Trackmania has a lot to teach game developers in terms of what is an acceptable fee for online play.

You can get the free game Trackmania Nations Forever. It is a full game with all options and one environment - which is usually enough for anyone thanks to the track editor. If you buy Trackmania United Forever, you get six more environments and you can play on the same servers as the Nations people plus your own United servers, which hardly even exist.

So you are effectively paying €30 for a bunch of useless environments which no one plays, the ability to download (or make) a custom car, and an ingame avatar. That's it! Yet people buy the full game despite being well aware of the above.

Why? Because Nations Forever is a complete game. It is complete and fun to play. And if you really are a fan and you spend a lot of time online, you may want to buy the boxed game and get yourself a fancy car.

......

Of course, Trackmania has much lower production values than D3 and going with the free game model would be stupid for Blizzard. Just assume that €30 is essentially a multiplayer premium fee and that the standard Blizzard-grade game costs €50 instead of €0.

The point remains: people are willing to pay quite a premium for not much of a benefit if they feel like it's their own choice to do it and they actually want the benefit of their own free will.


Another reason people were willing to purchase Trackmania United Forever was to support a company with good business practices.