Recent string of Emails to Smedley in regards to PS1 F2P Status - Page 3

Zulthus · 2013-04-20, 04:37 PM

Pretty much this ^. Everyone needs to stop assuming that nobody will ever play the game again once its F2P. It's a stupid and ridiculous assumption and acting like you could possibly know that is irritating.

Tons of people still play EverQuest 1, probably because it's F2P. There's absolutely no reason why Planetside 1 and Planetside 2 can't coexist together. By the logic I'm seeing from some people, they should just shut down EQ1 because it's 'the past' and put all of their effort into EQ2/3.

So, if you don't care about PS1 anymore and "you'll never go back to it" (which I guarantee you will once it's F2P) then you have no reason to post in this thread.

Furber · 2013-04-20, 04:45 PM

PS1 and PS2 are so vastly different, it shouldn't be hard to understand that some people just like 1 more than the other.
Different strokes for different folks; it's not fair to say yours is the best so the other shouldn't exist.

Atheosim · 2013-04-20, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by Furber

PS1 and PS2 are so vastly different, it shouldn't be hard to understand that some people just like 1 more than the other.
Different strokes for different folks; it's not fair to say yours is the best so the other shouldn't exist.

Agreed.

They're two entirely different games. I prefer one over the other. Why is that incredible?

Baneblade · 2013-04-20, 06:22 PM

I think SOE is afraid PS1 will hurt PS2... or something. I do have fun playing PS2, but it has never engaged me for hours on end like PS1.

The only reason I don't play PS1 right now... is I don't want to be forced to pay for the right to stand around an empty world wondering when SOE will open the floodgates.

Crator · 2013-04-20, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by Zulthus

Pretty much this ^. Everyone needs to stop assuming that nobody will ever play the game again once its F2P. It's a stupid and ridiculous assumption and acting like you could possibly know that is irritating.

Tons of people still play EverQuest 1, probably because it's F2P. There's absolutely no reason why Planetside 1 and Planetside 2 can't coexist together. By the logic I'm seeing from some people, they should just shut down EQ1 because it's 'the past' and put all of their effort into EQ2/3.

So, if you don't care about PS1 anymore and "you'll never go back to it" (which I guarantee you will once it's F2P) then you have no reason to post in this thread.

^ This, exactly this. Thanks Zulthus. I think one of the driving forces why PS1 wasn't more popular was due to the sub price. It would be cool to see just how many players PS2 actually would have acquired/retained with a sub price. I'd imagine it would be close to what PS1 had throughout it's years.

Figment · 2013-04-20, 08:49 PM

I would add that players that cannot afford to invest in new rigs shouldn't be scoffed at. Certainly not in economic dire times.

I don't get why they don't just include it in the PS2 premium tomorrow. That is simply a database thing. I know a lot of people on my steam that would go for it.

From a lot of different outfits. Those people currently aren't playing PS2 for many reasons.

It has been asked during beta and recently to new players of the series if they would like to play the old one. A lot would.

See. If I get a new game in a series marked No.2, 3, 4, etc. and I like that, I often look up other games in the same series. When I found Dune2000, a game based on the 1994 C&C engine, I just had to have it. Even if I didn't know the Dune books, movie or series. With Ceasar III, I went and got Caesar I and II. I then got Pharao and that Greek spin-off too. Total War series: first got Rome Total War, consequently bought the entire series, including Shogun, which I once heard from years before but never got to play.

When I came across Commandos collector pack, I just had to get them and play all missions. Sadly not every game was properly compatible with my new rig.

Sure, in some cases it is nostalgia and if it doesn't offer self-creating and creative content (which ps1 does!), it may be short lived. However, ps1 is a game that would last for a few more years, because of the gameplay being as well thoughtout as C&C's original: very decent, sometimes crude, sometimes buggy or exploitable, but still good.

But just because there is C&C 3, RA3, etc all with better graphs, doesn't mean that the original games and engine are so crap nobody would play it again. Not sure if you ever gone back, but I know at least I do. Surely there are others like me?

Hell, I still play chess and minesweeper and I don't give a damn about the graphics. In fact, if I found a compatible version of DOS Battlechess... Anyway. Played Monkey Island™ once at a friend in the days of floppy disks and at some point found Monkey Island™ 3 and then had to get mi1™ and mi2™ on a DOS emulator once more. In fact I recently bought the graphics overhaul of both and love the intant switching to old school style.

Got Indiana Jones Fate of Atlantis™ due to Monkey Island™.

Then had to get the other Lucas Arts Indiana Jones games...

So why the bloody hell wouldn't I and others want to go and play a game we played for a decade? And who says there is no fresh blood to get? During beta we found new PS2 players joining the outfit and going into ps1 with us, absolutely falling in love with our thundy groups during the last decent Gemini fights.

The free month got loads of people in with multiple cont fights. Then the sub kicked in again and people left all over.

vieric · 2013-04-20, 09:12 PM

I myself am not a PS1 vet, Seeing its gameplay I fell in love with it, but due to financial constraints have not and indeed likely will not be able to afford a sub, empty as it is now I admit I'd probably hesitate even if I could afford it.

I am far from the only person in this situation, there are hundreds of people like me out there, and far more than that who outright haven't checked the game out yet but would love it if they did. As I said in the previous post, the crazy sub fees are stopping people not just from playing, but from checking the game out to begin with.

MasterChief096 · 2013-04-21, 12:15 AM

Why doesn't SOE prove us wrong by giving us a free month in May to celebrate the anniversary.

Oh, and they have to actually announce it, not try to shove it under the rug so it fails on purpose.

SOE would see that there are probably at least 1000+ people willing to go back.

kubacheski · 2013-04-21, 01:13 AM

I gotta disagree that noone will play. Look at all of the games that have gone from sub to F2P. They end up having larger playerbase and make more money than the subscription model. The way this is done, as you all know, is by slicing up the content (into microtransactions) and allowing players to choose where they want to invest their cash. As the player gets more choice in what the investment is going for, they feel more comfortable paying to get what they want. Playerbase goes up as there's no fee for the casual player (or hardcore who doesn't mind grinding for the perks you can pay for).

The difference with those games, as compared to PS1, is that they had a development team assigned to them for content and maintenance as they were new and had years of life left in them. It's a much simpler matter of having the people who wrote and maintain the code modify and prepare for transition to F2P, than to have an after the fact (i.e. take resources from somewhere else) to completely change the structure. It's going to be a significant investment to slice up PS1 into microtransations as:

1) No dev team. When was the last update? Who's left that coded the original? Heck PSNext was only a graphics update which would include minimal code changes. F2P is a major change.

2) It was written a long time ago. Think of it like this: subscriptions were virtually untried when PS1 was released! Think of that. All games were buy it once and play it before this. Very, very few made money with a "pay as you go" subscription. Now even subs are going away.

3) What content are you going to pay for? Players already have invested time to get everything. Exp'd to BR40 CR5. It's not like starting over and saying you've got options to pay for faster exp or different guns. The game has been online too long or it simply isn't setup that way. Certs are different between PS1 and PS2 so there's no direct correlations.

So what do you do? Just make it free? Charge a few bucks a month to keep the electricity to the server(s)? Invest a lot of capital in changing the game to allow microtransactions?

The answer that I like best is PS Next. Continue with the graphics update and lower the monthly cost. I mean seriously, $15 gets you premium in PS2. The same price is being charged for PS1. Really?

Or another route to go is to continue developing PS2 with a parallel server setup. ForgeLight running an instance with a more PS1 "feel" with lattice, cont lock, sanctuary, restructured certifications (no more class implementation), inventory (man i miss that), implants, combat engineers, jacking, longer TTK, command console base capture, etc. I use these as examples because in Alpha the devs said said these options were the direction they were going. So a lot of this was implemented at one time.

The parallel server will get no attention as it's probably just as much work as inserting microtransactions into PS1. Imagine having to rebalance for those changes. Imagine if they implement combat engineers or group certifications similar to PS1. Would anyone implement more content on a "nitch server"? Heck you could make the sub an extra $5 or something for the extra cost to support the nitch server. Separate from, or rather an add-on to, the regular PS2 subscription. Say a sub to the "PS1 on ForgeLight" server without the perks of extra exp and resources, no Station Cash. Change the value add to the player from the extras the PS2 sub gives to simple development and support for the "PS1 on ForgeLight" servers and applications.

The thing I dislike most is that I truly agree with Smed in that noone is looking at it. I dislike it because it's true - SOE is going to spend more resources on the things that are going to give them the most return on that investment. Does anyone think that PS1 is ever going to make as much $$ as PS2? I sure dont. In the end it's a business decision, and the incentive is simply not there to do much more with PS1.

Hamma · 2013-04-22, 10:01 AM

Originally Posted by Effective

The past is sometimes better then the future

Oh I agree, but by it's very definition it's the past.. it's time to let go.

Effective · 2013-04-22, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Oh I agree, but by it's very definition it's the past.. it's time to let go.

I'll consider it once PS2 is more then just a larger sci-fi version of Battlefield.

vieric · 2013-04-22, 12:10 PM

Originally Posted by Hamma

Oh I agree, but by it's very definition it's the past.. it's time to let go.

but why? should I chuck my copy of Deus Ex in the bin just because human revolution is around too? Forgive me, but perhaps I am failing to see your train of thought...what I'm taking away from it is that old things no longer have the right to exist once something new comes out.

And believe me there ARE people out there who want to play this, old and new...the only thing most of us want at this point is the chance to prove it...anything else we want can (and indeed, should) come after that.