Sign in to follow this  
Sarcaticous

F2P Or P2P?

Recommended Posts

Once it starts you can't stop it, and at some point there will be magic shovels, thats simply how it works. -1

WTS coc and woa shovels...

Many people are making suggestions to get more money in that revolve around attracting a much larger playerbase by appealing to the masses (the OP here mentioned shorter timers for instance). Obviously Rolf is going to listen to peoples wants to a certain extent, but also consider that he is trying to make the game he envisioned and wants to make. He's not in this for the glory and instant millions, otherwise Wurm would have taken a different route.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I see something like this and people are against it I wonder why they think someone is holding a gun to their head? You don't have to buy stuff from a cash shop same as no one has to do the bitcoin thing or the awards thing. If you don't want to do it then don't. It looks to me like it would be another way for the game to make money for people who want to take part in it. If people are so set against it I suspect a selfish motive. Maybe they a afraid they won't earn as much silver in game.

Again, if you don't want to take part in any of these things no one will make you. It's entirely voluntary. Personally I don't give darn either way. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I see something like this and people are against it I wonder why they think someone is holding a gun to their head? You don't have to buy stuff from a cash shop same as no one has to do the bitcoin thing or the awards thing. If you don't want to do it then don't. It looks to me like it would be another way for the game to make money for people who want to take part in it. If people are so set against it I suspect a selfish motive. Maybe they a afraid they won't earn as much silver in game.

Again, if you don't want to take part in any of these things no one will make you. It's entirely voluntary. Personally I don't give darn either way. :P

I don't think it's about that. It's about wanting to be able to compete on the merits of the effort and time they've put in to the game, rather than having to pay money for items etc to be able to compete. And competing doesn't just have to mean earning money. Personally I really dislike the mentality some people have in online games of just trying to make as much money out of it as possible. I could never play like that, but I respect that some do and it's their choice. However, to me, paying money to advance themselves (note, I have no problem with account buying - someone has at least put the time and effort in to creating said account) is tantamount to cheating. That's why I dislike pay-to-win.
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always some smartass who wants to misunderstand, isn't there? :D

a ) the player who paid, will hardly be seen as the person who dug down the mountain. It would be a community project though, which is also one of those Wurm things a person can admire.

b ) pick another example if you like. How's about ql90 sword? You can't turn that into a community project. The smith will have to be a person who trained that skill, instead of using a 'holy hammer of +80 smithing skill'.

You misunderstand me.

Train for years to make a 90ql sword, or pay a craftsmen a few silver for it. Either way, you get one. We don't need a "magic sword" in the "Pay to win" store. You can get it in game.

Train for months/work for months to clear a mountain. or pay a few hundred workers to do it for you (even if it benefits a community, you funded the project). Arguably, if you fund a project like this, you could very well "Toll" the passage. Just depends on how much justification you have to do it. (if you start a project with the stated purpose of tolling, and lock off access during construction to only those working for you, you have every reason/justification to "own" it as long as you can pay for the deeds that control access.

It is not griefing to control a "short cut" that you made yourself, or funded yourself.

All possible in wurm without needing NPCs and fancy named tools. You just have to work with other players. Which is how it should be. You can very well "Pay to Win" in wurm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I see something like this and people are against it I wonder why they think someone is holding a gun to their head? You don't have to buy stuff from a cash shop same as no one has to do the bitcoin thing or the awards thing. If you don't want to do it then don't. It looks to me like it would be another way for the game to make money for people who want to take part in it. If people are so set against it I suspect a selfish motive. Maybe they a afraid they won't earn as much silver in game.

Again, if you don't want to take part in any of these things no one will make you. It's entirely voluntary. Personally I don't give darn either way. :P

the thing with pay2win* (imo) is that there will be a large inflow of cash for the first couple months? then it will drop to almost nothing because players like me who don't play2win will disappear because I would think "whats the point? ive spent so much time developing my character only for someone with cash surpass me in a fraction of the time" that will leave only the play2win people standing at the top and others like me will just say "meh, never gonna catch up, no point, what other games are out there"

there is a reason im still here after almost 7 years. its a nice slow paced game with a proper working skill curve. the reason I don't play these play2win games anymore is because "whats the point?"

Edited by Acaos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pay to play rather than pay to win. What the statistics consider to be the trending payment method of this year is irrelevant to my opinon on this. Thank you and goodnight.

Edited by EliasTheCrimson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i feel like you pulled that playerbase v. forums ratio out of your ass

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

everyone say that more things to shop would make it pay2win

what would a cloth hat worth of 2euros make you win in game? you would look maybe more unique than others, but it doesnt give you the 'win'

in PvE, you cannot buy win, because you cannot really define 'win' in there.

Higher skills or nicer deed might not mean you won someone.

I suggest more of 'useless' stuff to be added in to shop. Things like special boots/hats/capes/backpacks/anything that would make u look different and MAYBE add 5-10% skillbonuses to certain skills.

Not too many items though

Also items like settlement token/merchant contract or any trader item could be also added to be bought with real money straight from wurm online shop.

Any little item would bring profit

Didnt pristine and release already bring a quite lots profit to Rolf? hosting servers and payin to voulonteer staffs doesnt really suck that much of money.

There is a fact that he also decides what he pays to himself and what he leaves for the game.

Using VAT 'change' as an excuse for price increase was a ridicilous move.

He took the easiest way out and didnt look for better solutions, little tired of hosting the same game for 8years?

[no not a rage post, just to open peoples' minds]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hosting servers and payin to voulonteer staffs doesnt really suck that much of money.
Well sure, paying volunteer staff costs exactly nothing :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because we dont agree with you we are funny?

Well you' re retarded then

No, they are actually fun, because they are based on a prejudice that was valid in 2005, not so much nowadays. So yeah, by the defenition of retarded (see 2 in quote below), your opinions are the retarded part of the thread.

re·tard

[ri-tahrd, for 1–3, 5; ree-tahrd for 4] Show IPA

verb (used with object)

1.

to make slow; delay the development or progress of (an action, process, etc.); hinder or impede.

verb (used without object)

2.

to be delayed.

noun

3.

a slowing down, diminution, or hindrance, as in a machine.

4.

Slang: Disparaging.

a.

a mentally retarded person.

b.

a person who is stupid, obtuse, or ineffective in some way: a hopeless social retard.

5.

Automotive, Machinery . an adjustment made in the setting of the distributor of an internal-combustion engine so that the spark for ignition in each cylinder is generated later in the cycle.

Maybe wurms strength lies in that it is a unique game that doesn't follow with the rest of 'the most popular way to play". I'm pretty sure the fact that wurm is different is what attracts the paying customers of Rolf; otherwise there's a bazillion other games out there that would be just the same and people would just hop over to the one next door.

Or maybe the fact that it caters to such a small universe is what's holding Wurm back.

I mean, look at Minecraft, most actions are pretty much instant (or as long as the animation lasts) and its a huge success, although its visually UGLY as sin, and not as in-depth as wurm. And yet Wurm is all happy and dandy with 5000 players, while minecraft is in the millions.

I like Wurm as it is, but seriously, in what way would faster timers make it any worse?

Sadly, I partially agree with the OP and disagree with the above quote only because I'm not so sure it's not already an "easy button" game. This is not a difficult game, this is a wait for the timer game. There is NOTHING difficult about watching netflix while waiting for timers to mine walls for example.

I'm all for having stuff take a lot of time to finish for that sense of accomplishment, but have it be an active amount of time where you have to participate, not wait 40secs per action and BOOM, a completed/imped item appears.

Cash shops can still be useful if used correctly, The above examples are pretty extreme with magic shovels and bs like that, but for example cosmetic items don't affect the game other than make stuff look good and yet can still provide income for the dev.

QFT

Edited by ReaverKane

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Introducing Wurm 2.0: twice as fast, but still a massive chore to play

Wurm will still be Action Timers: The Game, it hardly matters whether they are 5 seconds or 5 minutes, the core game still sucks and is hardly appealing to casuals. Just polish the core and it will shine brighter

Minecraft is as shallow as a teaspoon tho, Notch dumped the concept down a tonne in order to appeal to a massive audience (and lotta viral advertisement). Rolf do at least keep to some sort of concept of consistancy

Edited by san_tropez

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or maybe the fact that it caters to such a small universe is what's holding Wurm back.

I mean, look at Minecraft, most actions are pretty much instant (or as long as the animation lasts) and its a huge success, although its visually UGLY as sin, and not as in-depth as wurm. And yet Wurm is all happy and dandy with 5000 players, while minecraft is in the millions.

Wurm fills a very narrow, very specific niche. As long as Rolf is OK with his game catering to that niche and not much else, saying that Wurm is being "held back" is meaningless - It may just as well be at its peak. Rolf has every opportunity in the world to make Wurm more appealing to a wider audience, but he doesn't seem to choose to do that. His motives are evidently something other than maximum amount of players & cash in his pocket.

Edited by EliasTheCrimson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one for the hypocrites. Multiple accounts = Pay To Win.

You don't have to have multiple accounts but you do to make the game easier. You don't have to use a cash shop but people do to make the game easier.

Multiple alts do the same thing. You use things to make the game easier for you that have nothing to do with playing the game other than to make it easier on you, the player. LMAO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is one for the hypocrites. Multiple accounts = Pay To Win.

You don't have to have multiple accounts but you do to make the game easier. You don't have to use a cash shop but people do to make the game easier.

Multiple alts do the same thing. You use things to make the game easier for you that have nothing to do with playing the game other than to make it easier on you, the player. LMAO.

You could also just pay people to do what you want, instead of buying items from a shop that do them.

Instead of mechanizing with NPCs and Faster do-dads why not talk with your neighbor and give them what you would have spent, for them to do it instead?

Unless you are macroing on your accounts, you are playing the game no matter how many characters you have on at one time.

Edited by Jarosz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Minecraft is as shallow as a teaspoon tho, Notch dumped the concept down a tonne in order to appeal to a massive audience (and lotta viral advertisement). Rolf do at least keep to some sort of concept of consistancy

Now Minecraft is a HUGE success.

Rolf says he wants to hire more people and wants to attract INVESTORS. Let me say that again. INVESTORS. He said to do that he needs to make a PROFIT. INVESTORS and PROFIT does not sound like he wants things to remain static. It sounds to me he wants a larger share of the market. A cash shop is just one way to attract more players. Making the game less of a grind is just one way to attract more players. In fact the grind is one of the biggest complaints by people who don't stick around.

No one says Rolf has to do anything. He can keep everything as it is and try and suck more cash out of a very very small player base. But it won't make any difference in the PROFITS or INVESTORS because going that route will never make him enough money unless he increases prices by a huge number. I don't care myself. Just thought I'd stick that article out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wurm fills a very narrow, very specific niche. As long as Rolf is OK with his game catering to that niche and not much else, saying that Wurm is being "held back" is meaningless - It may just as well be at its peak. Rolf has every opportunity in the world to make Wurm more appealing to a wider audience, but he doesn't seem to choose to do that. His motives are evidently something other than maximum amount of players & cash in his pocket.

Don't get me wrong, i love wurm as it is, and i'm one of those that are into the niche.

Was just throwing in a different spin to what alyeska was saying. But there's no denying that if wurm was more polished in the fighting mechanics and not as slow and cumbersome to do some stuff (one good example is boats, even a rowing boat -which is the most basic water transportation - takes over 200 individual parts, there's no middle ground, no "starter" stuff, houses are a good example, most starting players don't want to spend a few hours (which is what it will take one) doing 80 planks and 4 large nails to make a tiny shack to keep their new things).

Wurm is way too user unfriendly, and that really holds it back. I mean just about anyone that enjoys sim city and sandboxes of that kind would love wurm, but you don't see those millions playing it, because its way to hostile for new players. And its getting worse, i mean when i started, we had GV to give us a chance to adapt and learn the game in a somewhat controlled environment without no "impossible" tasks. Now with how things are, in addition to coping with a hostile and hard to grasp UI and steep learning curve, they have to cope with hordes of hostiles (that include trolls which are impossible to kill).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a question of scale, and where Rolf sets the bar. Code Club's profit and overall financial turnover has increased quite dramatically over the last few years according to Code Club's financial statements (you can find a compilation of some of that information HERE (Swedish source)). Wurm can, and has, grown without necessarily competing on the same market as Minecraft.

sSFrE.jpg

Annual financial turnover of Code Club (Retreiver Business)

Wurm is way too user unfriendly, and that really holds it back. I mean just about anyone that enjoys sim city and sandboxes of that kind would love wurm,

Personally I don't think that's true at all. While they may both fall into the sandbox genre the level Sim City and Wurm operate on is vastly different and they don't share the same fan base because they appeal by design to vastly different skill sets and preferences. But then again, I classify Wurm as a challenging fantasy-survival MMO with some sandbox elements, not a sandbox management game.

Again, Wurm by design renders its target audience narrow. While there are lots of small things that I think could be developed or changed I don't support changing that overall design to appeal to a significantly wider taste. Call it selfish if you want; in the end what matters is where Rolf wants to take Wurm.

Edited by EliasTheCrimson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now Minecraft is a HUGE success.

Rolf says he wants to hire more people and wants to attract INVESTORS. Let me say that again. INVESTORS. He said to do that he needs to make a PROFIT. INVESTORS and PROFIT does not sound like he wants things to remain static. It sounds to me he wants a larger share of the market. A cash shop is just one way to attract more players. Making the game less of a grind is just one way to attract more players. In fact the grind is one of the biggest complaints by people who don't stick around.

No one says Rolf has to do anything. He can keep everything as it is and try and suck more cash out of a very very small player base. But it won't make any difference in the PROFITS or INVESTORS because going that route will never make him enough money unless he increases prices by a huge number. I don't care myself. Just thought I'd stick that article out there.

Rolf has also said he doesn't want to have Wurm grow faster than it is ready for. Some say he is a control freak, but really its because he knows he has a community that likes the game in its current form. And, in its current form it attracts just enough profit to keep Wurm in development, in the style that Rolf likes.

Rolf started with Notch (the creator of minecraft) Rolf did the server coding, and Notch did the world coding. I would take a bet that Rolf is experimenting right now with having different instances of the game running with different rule sets. (IE, Epic vs Chaos/Freedom etc). It could very well be that some day, Rolf goes big and lets people customize their wurm experience in a Dungeons and Dragons sort of way... as it was developed from a MUD.

that can't happen if Rolf loses control of the development, and caves to investors.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 'player base' do you mean the 1% who are on the forums or the 99% who are not on the forums? 1% Does not a player base make.

By playerbase I refer to the vast majority of players Ive known in Wurm over the years... hell most of the upper GMs were still regular players then. In addition to the 3-4 various forums Wurm has gone through since 2006.

Edited by Klaa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The current system is not great otherwise the game would be far more popular. You can cater to more people by separating shards into things such as

1, normal wurm

2, exp gain +25%, action bar rates reduced by 25%(as an example)

3, F2P only shard

4, premium only shards

The 1 thing which has made this game popular to a small community is the 1 thing which also holds this game back and thats time investment, you do not need to ruin it for 1 group without pleasing the other group and at the end of the day more players = more money = better development, there are reasons why a sandbox/building/survival MMO only has 1000 active players, this is more to do with game design rather than F2P or P2P.

F2P is far too restrictive in terms of skill caps and those same skill caps limit hugely the amount of players which would even consider trying to the game out, myself as an example i only finally bit the bullet so to speak because i was bored and thought why not. I had known about the game for years and its a style of game i love, yet the restrictions put me off from trying it regardless of the fact i would have no issue dropping money into the game.

What i would i do is remove the 20 skill cap and raise it to 50, but back to design again due to bad design choices and the ability to earn premium in game you are stuck not allowing this, which is where the server shard segregation of rules comes into play.

There are some very serious reasons why the game is not popular, going fully to F2P or fully P2P changes none of them and i dont think its the correct place for me to go into them, the above would be the best way to increase the user base and new unique players, but it wont change the fact the game will appeal to a very small amount of players due to some issues with the game itself, rather than the fact of its genre and time sink design

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the best as it is now.

(MINUS THE DISGUSTING PRICE INCREASE)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The current system is not great otherwise the game would be far more popular. You can cater to more people by separating shards into things such as

1, normal wurm

2, exp gain +25%, action bar rates reduced by 25%(as an example)

3, F2P only shard

4, premium only shards

The 1 thing which has made this game popular to a small community is the 1 thing which also holds this game back and thats time investment, you do not need to ruin it for 1 group without pleasing the other group and at the end of the day more players = more money = better development, there are reasons why a sandbox/building/survival MMO only has 1000 active players, this is more to do with game design rather than F2P or P2P.

F2P is far too restrictive in terms of skill caps and those same skill caps limit hugely the amount of players which would even consider trying to the game out, myself as an example i only finally bit the bullet so to speak because i was bored and thought why not. I had known about the game for years and its a style of game i love, yet the restrictions put me off from trying it regardless of the fact i would have no issue dropping money into the game.

What i would i do is remove the 20 skill cap and raise it to 50, but back to design again due to bad design choices and the ability to earn premium in game you are stuck not allowing this, which is where the server shard segregation of rules comes into play.

There are some very serious reasons why the game is not popular, going fully to F2P or fully P2P changes none of them and i dont think its the correct place for me to go into them, the above would be the best way to increase the user base and new unique players, but it wont change the fact the game will appeal to a very small amount of players due to some issues with the game itself, rather than the fact of its genre and time sink design

I'm confused by your suggestions.

1. I guess that is what we already have?

2. Similar to epic.

3. That used to be GV & they dropped that.

4. Current elevation & how old servers used to be.

But if you were to implement them all at once you'd divide the playerbase more.Having people who have played for years willing to spend some time helping out the new guys is a huuuge +1. This can be answering questions, helping building projects, supplying tools & materials. Intermingling f2p with the other guys gives the f2p a chance to earn silver. If they had their own server that opportunity wouldn't be there. So I'm not quite sure where you're coming from with this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ The current system is not great otherwise the game would be far more popular. You can cater to more people by separating shards into things such as

1, normal wurm

2, exp gain +25%, action bar rates reduced by 25%(as an example)

3, F2P only shard

4, premium only shards

The 1 thing which has made this game popular to a small community is the 1 thing which also holds this game back and thats time investment, you do not need to ruin it for 1 group without pleasing the other group and at the end of the day more players = more money = better development, there are reasons why a sandbox/building/survival MMO only has 1000 active players, this is more to do with game design rather than F2P or P2P.

F2P is far too restrictive in terms of skill caps and those same skill caps limit hugely the amount of players which would even consider trying to the game out, myself as an example i only finally bit the bullet so to speak because i was bored and thought why not. I had known about the game for years and its a style of game i love, yet the restrictions put me off from trying it regardless of the fact i would have no issue dropping money into the game.

What i would i do is remove the 20 skill cap and raise it to 50, but back to design again due to bad design choices and the ability to earn premium in game you are stuck not allowing this, which is where the server shard segregation of rules comes into play.

There are some very serious reasons why the game is not popular, going fully to F2P or fully P2P changes none of them and i dont think its the correct place for me to go into them, the above would be the best way to increase the user base and new unique players, but it wont change the fact the game will appeal to a very small amount of players due to some issues with the game itself, rather than the fact of its genre and time sink design

The are not many players becouse the "mass" likes fast-paced, easy games which do not require time investment. That's why wurm can't be so popular.

F2P restrictions are good. If you don't want to pay you can have a great time ( i was playing for abour or more than year with F2P ). Moreover you can invest time to gain practically everything from few coins to traders,premium,deeds.

Raising cap to 50 will be absolutely insane. F2Ps will start bashing, griefing and so on. Also rectrictions won't help becouse less players will buy premium.

Buy or play that's an option to become premium. If you just don't want to benefit wurm (investing time and making goods for it's economy or paying with real cash for money) then don't play.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i love wurm the way it is currently, it's perfect and definitely doesn't need to be easier

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this