The future of NWN 1 (and some commentary on MMOs in general)

[Legacy_Lazarus Magni]

               The price of hosting has to do with one of the main points I have been making which seems to have been lost in all the B.S.

That point being, game developers are scared of making another nwn 1. They don’t want to make and support a game that can hold it’s customers interest for over 10 years. Not unless they can continue to make money off it. I don’t blame them, they are businesses.

However what I purposed was a model where by a developer could have incentive for making a similar, highly customizable semi-open source game (like nwn 1), that would still be free for the majority of the players to play, and yet they would still continue to make money from even 10 years later (aka have a reason to make it in the first place, and support it for as long as it continues to hold it’s customers interest.)
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               The thing I think pay-to-play MMOs offer that NWN cannot is the heavy investment of time on the part of the developers.

NWN CC authors and server admins can spend all their free time working on bringing great content to players and it can have wonderful results. But we have to eat, which means we have full-time jobs apart from the game. We can't afford to quit our jobs and do NWN full-time, as nice as the thought may be.

Blizzard doesn't have that problem. Their job is literally to keep bringing new content to the players, to keep tweaking, and to keep managing the community. And they have a huge staff of talented people to do it. But to afford that, they have to charge.

So the real cost of running a game is not hosting (though that can be substantial for a large game like WoW, it's a non-issue for most NWN admins); it's zots. Even with crowdsourcing from an excited and dedicated community, NWN simply can't muster the number of quality man-hours that a paid Blizzard development team can.

(Side note: this is why the NWN community was so impressed with BioWare: they kept patching NWN and released a massive final patch as a last hurrah. Releasing free content doesn't pay the bills, yet BioWare spent a large amount of time and energy doing it anyway. I think that shows just how much BioWare loves NWN and the community that supports it.)

For some people, the promise of a continually new, re-balanced, and maintained game is worth paying a monthly fee. For others, it's not. For some people, the freedom to create your own world is worth the time and effort. For others, it's not. I think it's smug and elitist to look down on folks of either persuasion. Both are valid viewpoints of people with different values.

For my part, I enjoy playing WoW. I also enjoy playing and developing for NWN.

Also, QFT:

SuperFly_2000 wrote...

Please stop calling anyone a troll...

If you're not helping to resolve the argument or move the discussion along, you may as well not post.

MM is asking the same question over and over again because Lazarus has given no clear answer. MM's point is valid: There is a price people are willing to pay for content. That price may be higher or lower depending on the person and the content. It's foolish to make a blanket statement that people who pay any monthly fee at all are "sheep" or "suckers", or that companies who charge a monthly fee for access to content are running a "scam."

I don't think this argument is likely to be settled now that egos have been dragged into it, though. So let's move on to more constructive discussion:

Lazarus Magni wrote...

However what I purposed was a model where by a developer could have incentive for making a similar, highly customizable semi-open source game (like nwn 1), that would still be free for the majority of the players to play, and yet they would still continue to make money from even 10 years later (aka have a reason to make it in the first place, and support it for as long as it continues to hold it’s customers interest.)

If you made a more detailed proposal, I missed it, and I apologize for making you repeat yourself.

How do you propose they could keep making money, especially if they're not going to keep charging money after the initial sale? I like the sentiment, but I don't see any practical way to do it.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Squatting Monk, 26 août 2012 - 10:11 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Frith5]

               Long ago, I wracked my brains trying to figure out a method that would allow for all this. Here's what I came up with: (I'm just gonna use Bioware and Faerun as developer and product respectively)

1. Bioware develops a game very similar to Neverwinter Nights, named Faerun, with an easy Toolset, DM Tools, etc.. The game and all the goodies sells for about $60. As with the original, it's 'free to play' for LAN, over the 'net, with PWs, etc. Same as before.
2. Bioware allows 'unsupported' PWs to flourish. These PWs utilize any content put out officially, and any CC the community produces. They have Bioware's blessing, but little else. No support, no advertising, etc.
3. Bioware also sells Official Licenses to PWs. This license has a steep up-front cost, say $350. With an official license comes Bioware PW support, in the form of advertising, tech support, special models, area pre-fabs, etc. An Official (and only an official) PW can charge players if they so desire, up to a set top limit imposed by Bioware. If they opt to charge, Bioware gets a slice off the fees, say 10%. This will drive PW owners to improve their quality, in order to gain players, keep players, and make some money. Bioware will gain by monthly fees off the top of each Official world, initial licensing fees, and new purchasers of the base game.

So, whaddaya think?

JFK
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Frith5, 26 août 2012 - 10:30 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

Urk wrote...

We've all MORE that heard you out and... NEWS FLASH... You haven't changed anybody's mind.

You make it sound like everyone on this forum except me hates P2P as much as Lazarus and you hate it.  And I'm some sort of outcast who is trying to get the entire forum to change their minds.

However, as you've hopefully seen, several people are fine with P2P and others are discussing its values or lack thereof.  This is a discussion board.  For a discussion.

WebShaman wrote...

This breaks things down to the heart of the matter here.  Unfortunately, what we really need to know is what is the service that they are willing to pay for?  What do they "know" they are getting, and why is it worth it?

Why does the free to play model not offer this?

I think this is the "meat" of the issue - what is the pay-to-play version offering that the free-to-play version is not offering?

Well, I think there are many facets to this question.  I'll try to briefly touch on a few points but I'll happily expand.

1, perception.  Let's just get this out of the way.  F2P games are generally considered second rate, because most
of them are second rate in terms of quality, polish, etc.  The general train of thought seems to be "If it was an amazing game, people would be willing to pay a subscription."  Any new game that's trying to go F2P in a market where the top games are P2P faces this stigma.  And, as you can imagine, there are a lot of people who don't like the feeling that they're playing a second rate game.

2, equality.  F2P is often referred to as P2W, or "Pay to Win."  The idea is that in many F2P games the only way to accomplish anything in a reasonable about of time is to dump a lot of money.  Instead of it taking an hour per level if you have an "experience bonus" that you purchase, it takes ten hours normally.  Many games also sell powerful items that creates an arms race of who is willing to pay more real money to be the best in the game - regardless of actual skill at the game itself.  I pay $5 for the Sword of Uberness +3, then you pay $6 for the Sword of Uberness +4 and beat me.  So then I pay $8 for the Sword of Uberness +6 so I can destroy you.  Then you pay to go buy an even better item.  Etc.  This is the perception (and in most cases the truth) of F2P.

3, stability.  At $15 a month in WoW, you know you get access to everything in the game.  You never have to worry about paying more to do something new, you receive Customer Support, and Blizzard can store account informaton indefinitely.  If you made a WoW account and then quit two months after the game release, it's still in Blizzard's database and all of your stuff is still there waiting for you.  If your account is hacked, it's restored.   It's a very stable environment you can pay $15 a month to access.

4, $15 per month isn't very much.  It costs you more to park for an hour downtown than a day of WoW costs.  $15 is like giving up a pizza once a month, or a few beers.  It's 25% of the price of a new game that might last you a week or two if you play it a lot.  And people thus feel it's worth paying $15 more per month for a better game.  Sort of like getting a hamburger at a fast food place or an actual restaurant.  You're paying more at the restaurant, but people feel the better food is worth it, because it's not like the better burger costs $200 more or something.

Interesting enough, I stumbled across a thread on the WoW forums that's basically about this very question.  You could read at least the first few pages if you want to see the myriad reasons why people think it's worth $15 a month to play.

Lazarus Magni wrote...

Speaking of services people are willing to pay for... I am not a super IT person, so yes this is a service I am willing to pay for.

Unless the server was dirt cheap, I think most hosts would rather just get a computer for it.  As WebShaman indicated above.

Squatting Monk wrote...

For some people, the promise of a continually new, re-balanced, and maintained game is worth paying a monthly fee. For others, it's not. For some people, the freedom to create your own world is worth the time and effort. For others, it's not. I think it's smug and elitist to look down on folks of either persuasion. Both are valid viewpoints of people with different values.

For my part, I enjoy playing WoW. I also enjoy playing and developing for NWN.

Likewise.

That said, in regards to the first paragraph, while there are certainly people looking down on people who pay a monthly fee, I don't think there's anyone looking down on people who create or even simply play in NWN.  I wouldn't be spending my time fiddling with the toolset and trying out some crazy stuff if I didn't think it was worth the time and energy.

Squatting Monk wrote...

MM is asking the same question over and over again because Lazarus has given no clear answer. MM's point is valid: There is a price people are willing to pay for content. That price may be higher or lower depending on the person and the content. It's foolish to make a blanket statement that people who pay any monthly fee at all are "sheep" or "suckers", or that companies who charge a monthly fee for access to content are running a "scam."

Precisely.  And to be absolutely clear, if someone doesn't think WoW is worth $15 a month for them, I have nothing against that.  My objection has always been the insulting of the people who choose to pay said monthly fee.

However, as Lazarus is mysteriously unwilling to clarify his views on the matter, I'll let it drop as I think the point is made.

Squatting Monk wrote...

If you made a more detailed proposal, I missed it, and I apologize for making you repeat yourself.

How do you propose they could keep making money, especially if they're not going to keep charging money after the initial sale? I like the sentiment, but I don't see any practical way to do it.

His idea was that Bioware could offer hosting services for NWN that PW owners would pay for instead of having to buy a computer, in a nutshell.  His opinion is there would be a market for reliable and official hosting from Bioware and that revenue could help sustain support for the game down the line.

Frith5 wrote...

3. Bioware also sells Official Licenses to PWs. This license has a steep up-front cost, say $350. With an official license comes Bioware PW support, in the form of advertising, tech support, special models, area pre-fabs, etc. An Official (and only an official) PW can charge players if they so desire, up to a set top limit imposed by Bioware. If they opt to charge, Bioware gets a slice off the fees, say 10%. This will drive PW owners to improve their quality, in order to gain players, keep players, and make some money. Bioware will gain by monthly fees off the top of each Official world, initial licensing fees, and new purchasers of the base game.

How would you keep track of the fees for the licensed PWs?

If anything, I think a simpler solution might be a game that sells for $60 and then a $5 a month or something online pass.  To access any game online, you need the pass, but with it you can access any multiplayer content.  Then PW owners are free to charge on top of that if they want.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par MagicalMaster, 26 août 2012 - 10:49 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_MagicalMaster]

               

WebShaman wrote...

This breaks things down to the heart of the matter here.  Unfortunately, what we really need to know is what is the service that they are willing to pay for?  What do they "know" they are getting, and why is it worth it?

Why does the free to play model not offer this?

I think this is the "meat" of the issue - what is the pay-to-play version offering that the free-to-play version is not offering?

Argh, forgot about one of my main points (and maybe even the most important).

I think most people realize the companies need to generate a certain amount of revenue to keep running the game, adding patches, providing support, etc.  As a result, they'd rather just pay an amount up front instead of knowing the developers are going to try to milk it out of them some other way.  Just pay once a month and never have to worry about the developers trying to make you miserable so you pay money to make things better.

Better to have a clear relationship where you pay and then the developers make a product worth paying for instead of having them scheme against you (well, scheme even MORE against you, perhaps).
               
               

               

                     Modifié par MagicalMaster, 26 août 2012 - 11:01 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Lazarus Magni]

               

Squatting Monk wrote...

Lazarus Magni wrote...

However what I purposed was a model where by a developer could have incentive for making a similar, highly customizable semi-open source game (like nwn 1), that would still be free for the majority of the players to play, and yet they would still continue to make money from even 10 years later (aka have a reason to make it in the first place, and support it for as long as it continues to hold it’s customers interest.)

If you made a more detailed proposal, I missed it, and I apologize for making you repeat yourself.

How do you propose they could keep making money, especially if they're not going to keep charging money after the initial sale? I like the sentiment, but I don't see any practical way to do it.

From a couple pages ago...

Lazarus Magni wrote...

... a nwn 1 like game that would give the developer incentive for continuing to support the game for years…

Say Bioware provided reasonably priced, high quality hosting. Say something like 1$ a slot/mo. Say half of the PWs went with this hosting service (actually it would prolly be more like 90% if it were the most affordable, and highest quality available.) So lets say 1000 PWs are using this hosting service, and averaging 45 slots per server. That’s 45k per month Bioware would still be making off this 10 year old game from the hosting side alone. That’s 5,400,000$ more in profits over 10 years. And that’s conservative. At nwn 1’s peak there were probably iduno? A couple 1000 servers? Under the action category alone, still to this day there are over 100 servers. And there are 10 or so other gaming categories (incidentally enough a couple of which are designated as PW, as a reply to your claim that Bioware never intended NWN 1 to have PWs, lol.)

Losing the master server really crippled NWN 1 PWs. Luckily Funky Swerve came up with a work around, but it didn’t mitigate the damage done to the player base, that is still being done. It only was a work around to prevent PW’s player accounts from being totally jacked. Bioware really let us down here. But don’t you think that might have been different if they were still pulling 25-50k/mo from hosting profits alone? In my estimation, the answer is yes.

And again, I would be interested to know what the actual percentage of PWs that have paid for hosting over the last decade. I am fairly sure it is substantial.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Urk]

               MM, don't put words in my mouth. I don't have a problem with the P2P model at all. My issue isn't with the model, it's with the value offered by most MMO's that currently use that model. You seem to like math, so let's look at the value being offered by blizzard for what boils down to monthly patches and server maintainence.

A player that has payed that monthly fee for the 8 years that WoW has been active has payed about $1,400 for the privilege of playing that one title. That's enough money to get your kid braces, pay for health insurance for 2-3 months (assuming your employer won't match), put a down payment on a pretty nice car, pay rent for a month or two, or take your family on a really nice vacation.

IMO anyone who pays that kind of money to play a video game is in need of serious professional help.

And of course there's the issue of "turning an honest profit" versus "ripping off marks".

In 2004 the internet was still pretty new and even gamers were kind of ignorant of the real costs involved with maintaining web servers. Well those days are gone, and as gamers become more sophisticated about the actual value of these types of services, fewer and fewer people are going to be willing to pay the ridiculous prices demanded by MMOs. This is a trend that is going to continue. Howl, defend, protest, rationalize until you're blue in the face. It won't make one lick of difference. Blizzard is going to continue to bleed customers and P2P startups, even monster licenses like SWtOR, are going to continue to sputter flat until they adjust their prices to more reasonably reflect the value that they are offering. People don't like being robbed, and what blizzard is engaged in is just that. They're like the cabbies hanging out at the airport so they can run up the charges on foreigners who don't know the value of a dollar.

7 million players (a conservative estimate) at $15/month comes to $105,000,000 per month, or more than $1.2 billion per year.

Do you really expect me to accept that Blizzard is providing a service that even comes CLOSE to offering that kind of value? MM, you're being jacked. If you're content to be a mark for this kind of profiteering be my guest, but don't be looking to me to respect your choice. All I have to offer is grudging acceptance and pity both for you and for your family as you ****** away the valuable resources that they depend on.

Frith... I actually did an initial post way back when that had nothing to with trolls...

Urk wrote...

MMO's aren't dead. MMO's will be around for a
LONG time. P2P MMO's are dead. $15 a month to play a video game that
you already payed for? IMO that's just stupid.

Ironically the
F2P model is going to drive itself out of fashion in pretty short order
too. Games need to be monetized. That's fair and reasonable, but the
price needs to be balanced with the value. The problem with MMO's isn't
the payment structure. F2P and P2P are both perfectly workable
solutions, as are all the various hybrids. The problems MMO's keep
having are just plain bad management.

WoW set a bad precedent.
They were new, they were exciting. They took an established business
model and turned it into a money mill. That became the bar.

This is an absurdity.

Still,
every MMO that's come out in the last decade has reached for that bar. I
won't get into all the reasons that this was a fool's errand, but the
short of it is they all failed. The golden age of WoW was a fluke. It
was a one time master stroke that will never happen again, and even
Blizzard is coming to terms with the idea that it wasn't sustainable.

The market is making decisions about value, but the managers aren't listening.

The market is no longer willing to pay $120 a year to play WoW.

So
now the kneejerk is switching to a F2P model. At first this was great.
You played for free and payed a little extra for a fancy horse or a
costume or emotive animations. But then the F2P tone began to change.
Now it's getting so that player trades are becoming tightly controlled
so they don't get in the way of the official store. Worse yet... it't
getting so that to compete at... or even REACH higher levels of play you
need to buy special equipment. Again... st first... no big deal. But
the payed items became more powerful and more expensive with each
release. Soon you're finding yourself paying more to update your
equipment every time the game is patched, and the free players fall
further and further behind the curve. The F2P managers are proudly
patting themselves on the back and ignoring the howls on their forums
until, once again... the players start to leave.

Eventually
these studios will find a balance of pay:play, but they are going to
need to shake off the ghost of WoW first. That lightning isn't going to
strike again. A new mindset needs to be adopted. If you can make an MMO
that people want to play, and make money at it, you've made a successful
game.

My mistake was not sticking to my guns when I refused to engage MM in his (now 5 page and counting) diatribe.

Urk wrote...

I don't quibble with trolls, dude.

               
               

               

                     Modifié par Urk, 27 août 2012 - 12:25 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Frith5]

               Yup, I read that post earlier. Valid opinions all around. '> The one comment you made that I agree most with, though, is that the market will drive prices. Amen! Let the market do just that! If Blizzard charges 'too much', then Blizzard will end up losing business, provided somebody offers the equivalent for less. Again, amen. '>

As for MMs question on how to keep track of the fees for Officially Licensed PWs, I admit I don't understand the question. How does a company keep track of anything? What am I missing? '> How would Bioware know how much a PW as taking in, you mean? Standard contract, and CD-key system I suppose would work to track unique PW users, x monthly PW fee / Bioware's share? Or do you mean something else?

JFK
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Frith5, 27 août 2012 - 12:41 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               

Lazarus Magni wrote...

From a couple pages ago...

Lazarus Magni wrote...

... a nwn 1 like game that would give the developer incentive for continuing to support the game for years…

Say Bioware provided reasonably priced, high quality hosting. Say something like 1$ a slot/mo. Say half of the PWs went with this hosting service (actually it would prolly be more like 90% if it were the most affordable, and highest quality available.) So lets say 1000 PWs are using this hosting service, and averaging 45 slots per server. That’s 45k per month Bioware would still be making off this 10 year old game from the hosting side alone. That’s 5,400,000$ more in profits over 10 years. And that’s conservative. At nwn 1’s peak there were probably iduno? A couple 1000 servers? Under the action category alone, still to this day there are over 100 servers. And there are 10 or so other gaming categories (incidentally enough a couple of which are designated as PW, as a reply to your claim that Bioware never intended NWN 1 to have PWs, lol.)

And again, I would be interested to know what the actual percentage of PWs that have paid for hosting over the last decade. I am fairly sure it is substantial.

Thanks for bringing me up to speed.

DICE is doing something like this for Battlefield 3. You can host a private server on their hardware for a monthly premium. Would be worth looking at the percentages of people who opt to do that to get an idea of how something similar might go over with a NWN-like game.

I think your numbers may be a little optimistic, though. While there may have been a couple thousand servers online during NWN's heyday, it's not reasonable to think that a significant majority of them would be wiling to pay for hosting if it was offered. After all, they already got their servers running. What would they have to gain from paying someone else to set it up and run it? Also, I think the reason so many are still running (despite being empty for years) is that self-hosting is cheap. As in: free. Sure, you have to pay for the internet connection, but you're probably not just keeping that around for your server. And yeah, you had to pay for a computer (maybe), but you've already spent that money. You're not continuing to lose more by keeping a neglected server around.

Then again, when people stop playing an MMO, some decide to cancel their subscription, while others don't mind leaving it alone in case they wanna pick it pack up. Depending on how flexible the service was and how reasonable the price to maintain an inactive server is, it may not be that bad.

As for me, I would prefer not to use a paid host, whatever the cost. Setting up and maintaining my own server is within my abilities, and I enjoy the freedom that managing my own box gives. As for cost: I had an old desktop lying around collecting dust, so I consulted Google on how to set it up as a web and game server. The only thing I've had to pay for is a dynamic DNS service to route my domain name to my home server, which runs me $25/year, and I could've gotten away with not even doing that for a total monetary cost of $0.

However, just because I was not willing to pay to have my server hosted does not mean everyone else will feel the same way. After all, I did put in quite a lot of time and effort. Some people would rather part with a reasonable amount of money to avoid that time and effort sink. It's nice to have the option, just as it's nice to have the option to play an MMO rather than having to create my own NWN server from scratch.

(Aside: a possible downside of a system like this is that it would probably raise the barrier of entry for people who don't want to use paid hosting. After all, if the company is making money by offering hassle-free server hosting, they have no incentive to make it easy for people to do paid hosting on their own hardware. Sure, it's possible they'd bend over backwards to hurt their profits, but it's improbable.)

If, as I said in my previous post, it's not hosting costs but zots that's the issue, I doubt paid hosting would be a viable way for NWN-like games to conquer MMOs on the market. It's possible that the company could use the revenue from hosting to continue releasing new content, and it's possible that the community would have significantly more time for content creation if the hassles of hosting weren't an issue. I'm not convinced, though.

Losing the master server really crippled NWN 1 PWs. Luckily Funky Swerve came up with a work around, but it didn’t mitigate the damage done to the player base, that is still being done. It only was a work around to prevent PW’s player accounts from being totally jacked. Bioware really let us down here. But don’t you think that might have been different if they were still pulling 25-50k/mo from hosting profits alone? In my estimation, the answer is yes.

My understanding was the master server was taken down because it was hacked and all the passwords were stolen. BioWare put restoring the server into Atari's hands (since NWN is Atari's property) and Atari hasn't done anything to fix it (and probably won't). Then again, Atari has been embroiled in lawsuits over this game for a while. They don't have the same loving attitude that BioWare did. I don't think that would change just because they were still pulling in a trickle of cash.

As for it crippling them, no. Funky's fix was something PWs should have implemented to begin with, as getting around the Master Server was still possible. It's just that now people can't be lazy about security because the vulnerabilities are obvious.
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               

Frith5 wrote...

Yup, I read that post earlier. Valid opinions all around. '> The one comment you made that I agree most with, though, is that the market will drive prices. Amen! Let the market do just that! If Blizzard charges 'too much', then Blizzard will end up losing business, provided somebody offers the equivalent for less. Again, amen. '>

This.

People who play WoW are saying, "I want to play a good MMO. WoW offers the best content and least hassle for my money. Until something more fun or better-priced comes out, I'll pay for WoW." It's not trolling to point out that this is a valid point of view, which is what MM has been doing this whole time.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Squatting Monk, 27 août 2012 - 01:05 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               

Frith5 wrote...

Long ago, I wracked my brains trying to figure out a method that would allow for all this. Here's what I came up with: (I'm just gonna use Bioware and Faerun as developer and product respectively)

1. Bioware develops a game very similar to Neverwinter Nights, named Faerun, with an easy Toolset, DM Tools, etc.. The game and all the goodies sells for about $60. As with the original, it's 'free to play' for LAN, over the 'net, with PWs, etc. Same as before.
2. Bioware allows 'unsupported' PWs to flourish. These PWs utilize any content put out officially, and any CC the community produces. They have Bioware's blessing, but little else. No support, no advertising, etc.
3. Bioware also sells Official Licenses to PWs. This license has a steep up-front cost, say $350. With an official license comes Bioware PW support, in the form of advertising, tech support, special models, area pre-fabs, etc. An Official (and only an official) PW can charge players if they so desire, up to a set top limit imposed by Bioware. If they opt to charge, Bioware gets a slice off the fees, say 10%. This will drive PW owners to improve their quality, in order to gain players, keep players, and make some money. Bioware will gain by monthly fees off the top of each Official world, initial licensing fees, and new purchasers of the base game.

So, whaddaya think?

JFK

I'm tired of writing walls of text, so I'll be brief.

This sounds reasonable. The difficulty would be in making sure you had a system and engine easy enough for amateurs to use and robust enough for professional-grade content. It blends elements of a F2P and P2P model, lets the market determine which servers do well, and still provides a haven for those who want a simple, cheap PW.

The lack of incentive to give good tools to unsupported servers is still a problem. How would you resolve that?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Lazarus Magni]

               Urk, Don’t let MM get under your skin. He is quite good at it, and seems to enjoy it. It also doesn’t seem to make you any friends. You are saying a lot of what I was saying, although a little more amicably. I have a tendency to say things coming from my heart, my gut more so than my brain some times. But hey, I don’t expect to make any friends who can’t handle that.

When you compare the numbers I threw out, with those you did, I guess a developer would consider my purposed idea of trickle of income compared to the flood from the wow model. But it sure is interesting, and just goes to prove the market does not always support quality. Comparing NWN 1 with WOW, there is no contest in quality IMO, NWN 1 wins hands down, and yet had a fraction of the profit for Bioware compared to the profit Blizzard has gotten from WOW (and is still getting.) I shoulda bought stock in Blizzard years ago…

-----------------------------------

SM, a couple points here. There is still no data (or practically none, a sample set of 3 is basically none when sampling a population of 1000’s if not 10’s of thousands [all the servers that have ever been in the last 10 years]) on the percentage of NWN 1 PWs that pay for hosting vs home host. Further more the population of PW owners has had 10 years to develop a method for home hosting, which may not have arisen if it were easily, and cheaply offered from the start with full support and high quality.

Not to mention, we are all aware how quickly hardware in the tech setting can become obsolete. If the next gen version of this gaming model came out, it could also use a next gen server platform, basically wiping the slate clean on who has the ability to host at the quality the game developer could offer. Video card manufacturers are practically in bed with game developers as an example.

The more tech minded might be able to macgyver together a server out of some trash score towers, and some bubble gum, but not everyone has that talent, the time, and or the resources.

As far as the master server… I beg to differ. First of all, bless Funky for releasing his system, but it took a pretty talented scripter to get it up and running on my PW. And secondly (and more importantly) it didn’t fix the problem, it just prevented it from getting worse. PW’s like mine which have a player base from years of being around got totally crippled, due to the fact that I (and the previous hosts of Av) were not keeping track of my players CD keys. Why? Because the master server did that for us. Sure moving forward, using Funky’s system when a new player logs into my server their public cd key is tied to their account. But what about the 9 years worth of player accounts in my server vault? I have over 4k player accounts (maybe a lot more) in my server vault. I had to disable every one of them due to account jackers. I consider that pretty darn crippling, and the drop off in NWN 1 players since that happened I think speaks to that as well.

--------------------------

Frith5, That is an interesting alternative idea. I am sure many PW owners would be over joyed to be able to be compensated for their time and money invested. It would get very complicated though with taxes, and all that jazz. I suppose they could be considered independent contractors, but wow, I can’t imagine the headache of working that out. Then again I am not tax lawyer.

Laz
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Lazarus Magni, 27 août 2012 - 08:42 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_MrZork]

               Frith5, I had a much longer post written up, but I will summarize by noting that the model you mention might well be a viable one, similar to the one Lazarus Magni mentioned. But, we really need some sense of how many people pay for hosting and how much they are currently paying for it in order to get a feel for its viability. And, I am talking just about the part where the game developer/publisher sells the client game to players and sells hosting services to PW owners at some ongoing rate.

The part about the game company taking a slice of any player fees I think would run into lots of legal concerns that most companies would probably rather avoid. Without going into detail, if a PW owner chooses to charge fees, he's going into business, which can quickly become a very complicated endeavor (regulations, employees, taxes, W-2 forms, consumer protection laws, security of customer financial info, etc.). If the game co. is getting a cut of player fees, then that company is tempting someone to name it as the deep pockets defendant in a lawsuit against the PW, if that PW does something wrong (and these PW owners will largely be people who aren't schooled in business law). I think the game company would be inclined to make the hosting fees a direct cost for PWs (perhaps scaling with the max simultaneous players) and let the PW owner determine whether and how to pass along that cost.

Anyway, can anyone who pays for hosting a PW tell us what typical hosting fees are?
               
               

               
            

[Legacy_Squatting Monk]

               

Lazarus Magni wrote...

Not to mention, we are all aware how quickly hardware in the tech setting can become obsolete. If the next gen version of this gaming model came out, it could also use a next gen server platform, basically wiping the slate clean on who has the ability to host at the quality the game developer could offer. Video card manufacturers are practically in bed with game developers as an example.

I don't think we'll see the specs on servers increasing nearly as rapidly as we will on the rigs that play the games. Remember, you don't need a video card (let alone a new one) to run a server. A 64 bit multi-threaded processor and a couple RAM sitcks? Yeah, sure. But much else beyond that? Not for several years at least.

The more tech minded might be able to macgyver together a server out of some trash score towers, and some bubble gum, but not everyone has that talent, the time, and or the resources.

Meh. I'm not terribly tech savvy, but a few afternoons playing around netted me a half-decent server. Dedication is really the deciding factor, not time or talent.
               
               

               

                     Modifié par Squatting Monk, 27 août 2012 - 08:58 .
                     
                  

            

[Legacy_WebShaman]

               This is an interesting bit of text

Urk said :

7 million players (a conservative estimate) at $15/month comes to $105,000,000 per month, or more than $1.2 billion per year.

Now, I don't know what the numbers are exactly (does anyone?), but even if the real number is remotely close, I think this does contain some astounding information.

That is an incredibly large amount of money.  100+ million a month??!!

So...if you are employing say...a development team of...what, around 50?  100?  1000?  10,000?  100,000?

I don't think I have ever really seen the numbers crunched out before.  That is such an unbelievably large amount of money rolling in, for...what?  What could one possibly be receiving in turn, a personal one-on-one DM, that is always present 24/7?

I hear things like "content", "stability", "quality" - but those are all pretty subjective terms, aren't they?

I understand that Blizzard patches routinely (what exactly do they patch?  Bugs I can understand.  Are they also adding content through patching?).  What seems sort of strange to me is that they then have these...expansions, right?  And they cost money.  

So I guess the big question is, why do they need to charge for these expansions, when there is a routine patching system (assuming it is being used to also add content)?

Why do I then need to purchase all these expansions AND pay a monthly fee?

I think it was stated that the monthly fee was for Staff costs, right?  Dev team, and all that?  But over $100 million a month??!!

I do find it hard to imagine that it is possible to get back that amount in value.  Keep in mind that I did try WoW (trial version) - it didn't "blow" my socks off like NWN does.  Instead, it seems like a huge PG driven game, with hordes of PG kiddies running about.  As for the RP aspect, it seemed to me (during this rather "brief" time spent on the game) that it only took place among Clan members, if that.

Which basically means that one can play a NWN RP friendly server and get the same value for free - and in fact, some of the best RP that I have yet to be witness to.

So what do those who play this MMO basically do in the game?  Can someone break down like a weekly routine here?  I mean, it is pay on a monthly basis to play (and at $15, doesn't that sort of make one want to play as much as possible, to get more "value" back out of that $15?).

I have never felt "forced" to play NWN (not even when I was playing in a closed DMed PnP style NWN Campaign).  I think if I was paying to play (especially $15 a month!), that that would change.  I also hear through other sources (those I know who either play WoW or have quit) that pressure from the Clans to raid or somesuch is also high, and that those who do not regularly participate enjoy the displeasure of the other members or somesuch.

So, basically, how does the numbers (in money here) stack up in the value returned for the pay-to-play system (ala WoW) verses the free-to-play system (ala NWN)?

I just can't help but feel that as a free-to-play player (ala NWN) that I am getting more value returned for my investment here (which is to say, I invest nothing but my time and receive far more in return than what I have invested, which is nothing, financially other than the initial cost of the game).

Then we come to the "other" thing that I mentioned - other-named WoW servers.  They are free-to-play (as I understand it - I am not well informed about them, so what do I really know?).  But the mere existence of such (regardless of what state they are in, so to speak) must have a huge psychological impact on the returned value of pay-to-play subscribers, doesn't it?  I mean, here you have Subscriber X paying $15 a month, and Subscriber Z paying...nothing?  Both get the same experience...

Hmmm.

That would really, really disturb me.