Spike TV: New Star Wars Game to be Revealed

[Nintendesert]

People don't own joysticks anymore so a flying game clicking with a mouse is pretty lame though Freelancer did a pretty good job with it. I think that's the biggest thing keeping any X-Wing/Tie Fighter game from getting made properly. The era of Wing Commander and Privateer is over. The last remnants of that are found in the X universe from Egosoft.

 

[thespyder]

Besides. the subscription-based model is archaic and unnecessary for an MMO.

Yeah, it is being rapidly replaced by the Pay-to-Win model, which is worse (IMHO).

 

[zinfamous]

Yeah, it is being rapidly replaced by the Pay-to-Win model, which is worse (IMHO).

those games die, too. Or, at least, have meager populations

 

[thespyder]

those games die, too. Or, at least, have meager populations

?? Most F2P games are pay to win games. You can play for free to experience a limited quantity of material. but if you want to have access to all areas, be able to get to all levels, Be able to utilize all abilities, you have to pay. And it is very popular these days.

Suck the shill in with 'Free' and then suck then dry with paid upgrades and micro-transactions.

 

[zinfamous]

?? Most F2P games are pay to win games. You can play for free to experience a limited quantity of material. but if you want to have access to all areas, be able to get to all levels, Be able to utilize all abilities, you have to pay. And it is very popular these days.

Suck the shill in with 'Free' and then suck then dry with paid upgrades and micro-transactions.

yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. F2P = Pay 2 Win. it is not the only model out there, and I see no reason why some consider it the only other model from subscription.


Why Not the GW model? They are the only non-WoW MMO that has survived for nearly as long, with relatively the same amount of players (er constant player population--not the same amount of players as WoW, of course ), and neither sub or F2P based.

You buy the game--that is it. Done. You want cool looking gear or something? (nothing different about the stats mind you--just aesthetic), then you can purchase some of that.

The only $$ I spent in GW outside of the game itself, over 7? years, was 2 extra characters slots (if you have all 3 campaigns and link them, you will need 2 more slots to create characters in all classes, if you wish), and a mission pack that gives access to some easily-customizable weapon sets.

That was $30 total, in 7 years, on top of the initial purchase. That would be gone in 2 months in a sub model--and these games all have notorious server downtime and constant patching (yes ToR is still "new" so maybe that is unfair). But I still wonder--wtf are we supposed to be paying for in these sub prices if other models don't seem to need this kind of funding to "keep their servers running."

:hmm:

 

[Nintendesert]

yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. F2P = Pay 2 Win. it is not the only model out there, and I see no reason why some consider it the only other model from subscription.


Why Not the GW model? They are the only non-WoW MMO that has survived for nearly as long, with relatively the same amount of players (er constant player population--not the same amount of players as WoW, of course ), and neither sub or F2P based.

You buy the game--that is it. Done. You want cool looking gear or something? (nothing different about the stats mind you--just aesthetic), then you can purchase some of that.

The only $$ I spent in GW outside of the game itself, over 7? years, was 2 extra characters slots (if you have all 3 campaigns and link them, you will need 2 more slots to create characters in all classes, if you wish), and a mission pack that gives access to some easily-customizable weapon sets.

That was $30 total, in 7 years, on top of the initial purchase. That would be gone in 2 months in a sub model--and these games all have notorious server downtime and constant patching (yes ToR is still "new" so maybe that is unfair). But I still wonder--wtf are we supposed to be paying for in these sub prices if other models don't seem to need this kind of funding to "keep their servers running."

:hmm:

You are the reason the GW model sucks from a business perspective. 30 bucks over 7 years?? That's two months to WoW or TOR. Why wouldn't they use a subscription based model when only a few months you make more than GW did in a few years.

 

[VulgarDisplay]

Hardly.

Maybe 10% of today's gamers have any memory of these games, on top of that--a serious fondness for them. Simulators and fighter games are all but dead, unfortunately. Not saying that the PC is dead, just that assumptions of its influence are grossly exaggerated.

Bottom line: It won't translate well to console. ....so you know what that means.

The problem is Lucas Arts controlling the license. Today, X-Wing/Tie-Fighter could only be produced through something like Kick Starter. In the contemporary world of share holder-driven game development, this game will never be made.

What makes you think a sim/dog fighting game won't translate well on consoles? The fact that nothing other than some 3rd person POS that doesn't have a decent IP backing it has been made for consoles doesn't mean consoles couldn't have a sim/flying game. If you think controls are the problem it would be easy enough to streamline things to work on a console controller.

I think that a flight simulator with the advent of xbox smartglass would almost be better on consoles... The possibilities for that technology in assisting control of games is almost limitless. Best thing shown at E3 this year.

 

[Sulaco]

What makes you think a sim/dog fighting game won't translate well on consoles? The fact that nothing other than some 3rd person POS that doesn't have a decent IP backing it has been made for consoles doesn't mean consoles couldn't have a sim/flying game. If you think controls are the problem it would be easy enough to streamline things to work on a console controller.

I think that a flight simulator with the advent of xbox smartglass would almost be better on consoles... The possibilities for that technology in assisting control of games is almost limitless. Best thing shown at E3 this year.

It's not that it CAN'T translate well. It's not even that the majority audience wouldn't like it. The problem is the same with most gaming crap out there today: it's that the publishers don't want to risk it. We hardly have first person shooters, perhaps the most straight forward and brainless genre out there, that let you do anything without holding your hand the whole way. They basically play themselves.

Anything with real depth and actual required strategy is mostly passed over by the large studios.

I don't know if they're right. None of us do. But it's pretty clear by the complete abandonment of the genre (and anything similar to it) that they don't think it's worth their time.
Again, the LCD test. If it can't be massively consumed by the lowest common denominator, it's not worth our time.

 

[thespyder]

If it can't be massively consumed by the lowest common denominator, it's not worth our time.

QFT!!!

That is EXACTLY how the publishers look at things today. more's the shame.

 

[zinfamous]

You are the reason the GW model sucks from a business perspective. 30 bucks over 7 years?? That's two months to WoW or TOR. Why wouldn't they use a subscription based model when only a few months you make more than GW did in a few years.

me? yes, maybe. But plenty of people buy that stuff.

Again--only WoW has remained sub based, and eve they are starting to tweak their model.

GW has run strong without having to change anything. Microtransactions make sense; especially when your microtransactions aren't the type that allow players to play more than 30% of a game.

Will people be more encouraged to spend more cash, when they know they aren't paying monthly, and compare that to other games that charged them so?

it's all about incentives, and adjusting the model. It could be that not having a monthly fee, you end up raking in more consistent money over the long run.

What percentage of people cancel their sub after 3 months or so? then--you can't play, and have zero chance to spend money.

How many people pay sub over 7 or 8 full years? not many, I'd wager. What about those that will keep an active FREE account over that same time period, thus increasing the likelihood that they will spend more cash on updates?

It's not that difficult to imagine why this potentially makes more business sense.


as a consumer, what do you prefer?

--You purchase a game, Bingo! you have a game. It is yours, no further monetary commitment if you so desire. Are you likely to play longer? Are you likely to spend money on things that improve your game experience?
--you purchase a game, must keep purchasing every month. How long are you likely to play when you have this extra bill each month? Will you be more or less likely to add charges to that in-game, knowing you are already paying?
--Free game, must pay $10 or more, here and there, to keep unlocking more percentage of the game.


Sometimes, the model that makes the most business sense is the one that actually attracts customers--not the one that puts up barriers to access the product that they have already purchased.

 

[zinfamous]

What makes you think a sim/dog fighting game won't translate well on consoles? The fact that nothing other than some 3rd person POS that doesn't have a decent IP backing it has been made for consoles doesn't mean consoles couldn't have a sim/flying game. If you think controls are the problem it would be easy enough to streamline things to work on a console controller.

I think that a flight simulator with the advent of xbox smartglass would almost be better on consoles... The possibilities for that technology in assisting control of games is almost limitless. Best thing shown at E3 this year.

It wouldn't be a sim on the caliber of XWing, though. Believe me--any fan of XWing excited to see such released on a console, with console controls, will quickly bitch, ask for their money back, threaten lawsuits, etc D), after discovering that the gameplay has to be seriously dumb-down to work on a console gamepad (I have no problem with gamepads, mind you).

Now, if the consoles create a flightstick for a serious X-Wing, Tie Fighter game...then that might have legs. Hard to say, though. Will the PC version suffer for the console version?

:\

 

[thespyder]

It wouldn't be a sim on the caliber of XWing, though. Believe me--any fan of XWing excited to see such released on a console, with console controls, will quickly bitch, ask for their money back, threaten lawsuits, etc D), after discovering that the gameplay has to be seriously dumb-down to work on a console gamepad (I have no problem with gamepads, mind you).

Now, if the consoles create a flightstick for a serious X-Wing, Tie Fighter game...then that might have legs. Hard to say, though. Will the PC version suffer for the console version?

:\

It has been many years since I played X-Wing/Tie Fighter, but.... I remember that you had shield control (front and back) and you could look around the cabin. and you had thrust and pitch and yaw controls. Plus Fire control (lazer and torpedo). but that doesn't seem like unaccomodatable with a joystick. or am I missing something?

I am not saying I want to see a consolized version, just curious how the scheme in concept wouldn't work on an Xbox controller.