Menu
New take on an old problem
Strangequark
Lets cut right to the chase because I have a penchant for typing long posts that not everyone reads. How do we get more players. IE bring players back, or attract new ones.
I see a lot of opinions on new content, or new playable races. Not being critical but there may be some bias in that if you have a favorite race that wasn't included in the base game.
Do they go the battleborn route? Does relic need to make the base game free, or darn near free so that we can actually get a decent pool of players? Transition the skull system to use it for purchasing skins and adding micro transactions to try and shore up the shortfall from the drop in game price. If you did that you'd have to unlocked the doctrines and elites for everyone or run the risk of being labeled pay to win since they affect gameplay. You could lower the amount of skulls you get playing, or put a high skull cost on skins.
I'm just spitballing here...
Comments
Brichals
They didn't make DoW2 F2P by the end of Retri and that was a good candidate with some nice skins and wargear for campaign, so I don't think DoW3 is a good candidate at the moment.
Personally I think they should keep going as they are slow and steady. This game in 6 months with more content and in a steam sale will be quite a good purchase.I don't want knee jerk changes to appease the angry mob. One of the main reasons to be anxious about playing already is the chance that you get a turtling rage kid team mate, I'd rather wait 20 minutes and get good games (yes I did this in DoW2 and didn't complain about it).
The other day I had a team mate that just built like 7 servitors to start with. I felt like asking them if they were a relic employee.
Strangequark
That's kinda the issue. When the game was in development and they were letting sneak peeks at things the community raised some questions over aesthetic choices. "Give it time, you don't know what direction they are going yet." When the playable demo's started circulating around press corps and there were more voices raised up in concern over design. "Its just a demo and doesn't reflect the finished product give it time." When the beta was released and all of those same concerns came right back "Its just a beta, who knows what's going to be in the finished product, give it time." When the game launched and within a day the player base was more than halved in less than 24 hours. "They are just playing the campaign, give it time." When I personally came on these forums to ring the alarm bell just a few weeks after release because of how quickly the player base was vanishing. "This is normal in any games life, here look at xcom for example, give it time". Now here we sit, under 700 players peak, under 250 players at low point, and I'm still hearing that same mantra.
In 6 months, which would be the 9 month mark of the games life, if we are still sitting at this same point, or worse (since we are still bleeding players) what then? We still waiting then?
The low player base is keeping the game mechanics and balance slow, there just isn't the data that you'd like to see for a healthy game to help nail that down faster, and its an active component in keeping it that way.
Brichals
I'd rather they add a new game mode like Last Stand to give raw numbers that we see on steamcharts a boost.
I still think the multiplayer is probably more active than Retri was at the end. We had one streamer streaming to a handful of people (Shalesey
), who just abused everybody, all the dozen or so top players hated each other, there was a serious self hating aspect of the player base and everyone thought DoW was dead, and it took at least 15 minutes to get a game. And steamcharts all this time said 2,500 - 3,000 players.
Oh and the Relic staff got some serious and disgusting abuse on all sides.
Coming to think of it, keep us happy few band of brothers nice small playerbase or let the game die as far as I care.
Strangequark
You can actually look at threads on this very forum that date from over a year ago, and you can see the same round and round arguments. People raising choices over design, and being told to give it time.
Saying, "Give it 6 months" isn't going to get us players right now, which is what it needs or we'll be back here talking again about how to raise the player numbers.
Strangequark
Well I know at least 15 people who would pick up and play if the game didn't have the price tag it does. 2 swedes, 2 british, 1 scotsman, and 10 americans, but they've told me in conversations they won't touch it for 60, or even 30 USD.
Brichals
If they can't shell out 30 dollars for this game then I don't care if they join it to be honest.
I'm British and I come from a very poor ex mining community. Everybody here (even the unemployed) has huge flat screen TVs, golf memberships and fairly new cars. Not wanting to splash out 20 pounds for a game is just puerile.
That being said, if you can wait to get it cheaper then of course it's good economics, but don't whine about it and say that it's overpriced on release.
Gorb
That would only help if the game actually had some kind of money-based progression system in it, though. Simply chancing an F2P model and hoping it gets players is, in my opinion, really not a sound business strategy?
It also invites backlash from people who paid for the game. This happened to Heroes of Newerth, and the developers spent years trying to balance account worth for those who valued it (against newer players with less investment).
If people don't want to pay for the game, that's entirely their choice. But that's where their purchasing power ends.
Opinion post.
Fww
In my opinion RTS genre is dead and this is why mp is dead as ++heresy redacted++.
The SP is nothing special with a campaign that you finish in 10hours and there no reason to replay it.
After seeing all those comments about "this isn't dawn of war" "DC was the best" made me realise that all they wanted is total war: w40k
Strangequark
That's why I posited transitioning the skull system into a micro transaction system to help make up the short fall from sales of the game proper, though you have to be really careful about using doctrines and elites in that way because you can invite that "pay to win" argument very quickly.
As far as players who paid for the game on release, or even bought it during the steam sale that relic would have to be more thoughtful about.
Eh ya know what....I'm throwing in the towel. It's August, I'll check back in on the forums and DoW3 proper around the holidays and see how things are then, but until then I'm going the route of so many others. Time to hit that ol dusty trail.~
Gorb
Yeah, sorry, I just assumed a more cosmetic tangent with these systems. My bad! Which tends to work well, but requires a significant (constant) delivery of art assets. Not that Relic aren't capable of such, but you'd need no small amount to start from.
Jelly
The benefits of less expensive games have been extensively tested and proven by Valve:
In other words the players themselves are a vital asset and making the barrier of entry small for them produces a virtuous circle. But furthermore, players must be made to believe in the longevity of the game and the promise of return on investment of their time, not just their money.
So while I agree with your suggestions @Strangequark it's probably the case that such maneuvers are in SEGA's hands rather than Relic's and given SEGA's history of greed they're unlikely to happen. The more realistic action would be for Relic to simply talk to us and show that they haven't abandoned ship and there are major developments to look forward to.
All we have to judge the future by is a weak release followed by weak patches and a lot of troubling silence.
Gorb
You have to bear in mind that Valve's studies will be coloured by the complete dominance of their platform and how their own games get pride of place in it (compared to other titles). Not to mention the relative ages these games like TF2 were made F2P in was a very different age to even the Steam platform today.
F2P also wrecked competitive multiplayer for quite some time in TF2, despite perception around what weapon picks were stronger than others (non-achievement weaponry, while useful in a lot of cases, were soon edged out by specific post-F2P variants that could only be crafted or obtained from a drop. Or unlocked from a crate, reliably!).
There isn't ever a cut-and-dry case, here. Valve's newer DotA 2 picked up an amazing following, but this wouldn't have been possible without the significant testing they performed on TF2, and it also wouldn't have been possible without them auto-adding their own F2P games to a brand new Steam account library. A benefit that no other F2P game on Steam gets (outside of time-limited free weekend events, in some cases).
Strangequark
Well Valve has some of the best minds in the business. No one in the industry seems to understand economics and how they are tied to access quite like Gaben. He's even on record that you should treat consumers like electricity. They almost always tend to follow the path of least resistance, and that's the exact reason why he left Microsoft in the first place way way back in the 90's.
Anyway I'm just wrapping up this topic because I'm finally done. With this game, and with relic. I've spent decades playing their games and enjoying myself until this game. I've been dragging my feet following my friends into other games, I've spent way to much time picking at mechanics and looking for fixes to the muddled gameplay this particular product has and I just can't do it anymore.
When I say holidays, I mean December, and I might as well leave my last post on the forum with a prediction, just cause I can come back then in 6 months time and see.
I don't think we'll see a race DLC in that timeframe, I think the player base might stabilize at the 500 peak player mark....maybe, with 100 to 130 at low time. If relic is lucky.
Anyway good luck with your games fellas if you still play. If you don't, I totally understand the why.
I'll leave with the first images that ever assaulted my eyes when I fired up a DoW game that had me instantly hooked on the IP, almost 20 years ago.
Jelly
From the same interview:
I'm sure there's evidence out there for other producers (Riot & mobile games off the top of my head), but as I said a price reduction is not realistic with SEGA at the helm anyway.
Gorb
@Jelly
A price reduction is very different to re-engineer something for F2P. I don't have enough reading on how Steam Sales work, and how Sales still work. That interview is from 2011; the Steam marketplace (and the user Marketplace) is a very different beast these days. Sorry though, I didn't make it clear enough that I was focusing on the F2P side of the suggestion.
We could also try putting in the same level of critique to companies like Valve, as we do to companies like SEGA. Or even outright skepticism! Some is healthy, after all
Jelly
I'd expect the data is still relevant considering Valve continued pursuing the model (and were extremely successful) with CS:GO and DoTA2, and your average gamer hasn't gotten any more wealthy in that time. This is still predominantly a leisure activity for the poor.
Come to think of it though, wasn't Total Warhammer incorporated into The Humble Bundle for $15 or so a few months ago? If SEGA would release detailed revenue data from that period we'd have more contemporary evidence, and a price reduction may not be beyond hope after all.
DeathAttacker
Going free to play is a bad idea as it doesn't fix the fundamental issues which are the game isn't fun to play to casuals due to the micro intensive unrewarding gameplay, and doesn't appeal to warhammer fans because the diregarded the lore and removed all of the cool story telling and voice acting.
Imo the best way to salvage the game is to add a VP mode, reduce the power of elites and all the ridiculous AOE abilities, and encourage unit preservation. Also they need to slowly start adding back the lore elements of the game, lascannons and gabe to start with.
That'd start to bring back both of the core audiences. Right now I have no idea who this game is actually meant to appeal too......
Gorb
I'm sure the data has some relevance, Jelly, But there is also data to support Valve engineering this as such, in a way that other games can't necessarily benefit from. Otherwise, every F2P game would be inherently successful, and that obviously isn't the case. It might get people to try out the product more reliably, but a demo or standalone product would do similar things there too.
I think people are too invested in the potential upsides here, and not considering the drawbacks. If the move to F2P was such a straightforwardly-beneficial move, you'd see every end-of-life game doing it for the heck of it, nevermind newer titles.
F2P relies on people making up the sales that otherwise would've occurred. The average consumer might not have more purchasing power, which is why the more F2P models available on the market, the more diluted their relative success is going to end up being. There's only so much money in the pot, and this pot has to drive the top-end purchasers' transactions that allow the game to stay afloat.
Tobi
Price drop?yes.f2p ?no it will bring new problems..
Jelly
@Gorb
What of Riot then? Candy Crush? What about services that aren't even video games — Pandora, Google, Twitch? Gratuity models have been the norm in the digital market for a long time now. If you really need hard numbers fresh off the excel sheet I'm sure you could find plenty.
I'm aware of the drawbacks; TF2 has never been the same for me and even after hundreds of hours I could never get used to being in a chain gang with the "people" who play Dota2. But again, a price reduction could earn the benefits of a larger player base without the F2P toxicity.
I disagree that DoW would be competing with all F2P or reduced-price games. Nostalgia releases aside RTS is a very dry market right now.
Gorb
There's a common saying about Google, which as a user of Android (and a software developer), I don't trot out to be trite, or to dismiss the benefits such a service provides, but basically if you don't pay for a product, then what you're using isn't the product. You are. It's a different paradigm, these digital environments compared to games. Well, for the most part. Games feature microtransactions; this is where the purchasing power comes from. With Google, it's browsing habits, spending habits, and shifting that data around the Internet (within accordance of what they're allowed to do).
I could write a lot of Riot (and mobile software (and games) specifically), but they basically founded the nascent MOBA genre
I mean, you're pointing out individual success stories in a market inundated with less successful stories. Eternal Crusade is a good one for the moment (despite me enjoying what I played of it, a year ago or more).
Again, I'm not talking specifically about a price reduction here. I'm discussing the dangers and pitfalls of converting a paid game to F2P. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am trying to get the discussion a bit further than "SEGA, lol so it won't happen". I spent a long time playing HoN (and TF2); both are good exercises in this vein (and examples of what Valve can get away with in the eye of public perception than an indie development company can).
edited a pretty dumb misphrase
Stoner
On topic, things that will increase population which I'm completely confident about are:
But they should concentrate at one thing at a time IMO.
What would be worst things for Relic to do is:
Giving free race DLCs aren't needed as well IMO, I'd gladly play ~$30 or more per race (and maybe extra content like campaign and stuff?), but I'd like to get this sooner than later and considering they are serious about getting this game into shape.
KINE
250,000 owners
less than 25,000 active players
Arguing about price misses the point here.
People already bought the game.
They just don't play it.
Sharp decrease in price will likely damage on-the-fence customers confidence instead of improving it. Not that there are many out there. Those who were interested in DOW3 had already bought it.
Many other titles have tried going the F2P route to regain playerbase. Nearly all failed.
Evolve for eg. from recent memory.
AAA budget flopped and went F2P
Still died
Alot of games in Steam's F2P category were paid titles once. All of them still obscure.
If a game lacks the playability to retain users, price slashes never fixes it. Like giving a blind man glasses to restore his sight.
DOW3 won't win back DOW2.5 crowd. That we already know. (Wished they do too)
But they aren't the only ones out there. There are other demographics Relic can still tap.
This game can still get Last Stand coop players
New interesting modes + races can bring back some who aren't hardcore DOW3 haters
etc.
And don't underestimate highly visible Relic sanctioned events covered on Twitch + YouTube + Steam + Discord.
People need to see high tier matches to appreciate what DOW3 is.
Right now the only perception people have on the game is the few hours they had trying the game way below the game's potential and all the red thumbs down on Steam saying what the game isn't.
To answer the Original Post:
Relic have got to separate those who will never come back to the game (DOW2.5 crowd) and those who just needs to see DOW3 at it's fullest potential.
Price cut and F2P won't achieve that.
Jelly
250,000 is definitely not everyone who was interested in the game. DoWII Retribution has ~1.3 million recorded players, SC2 well over 3 million. New blood is out there and we need them.
Rainbow 6 Siege experimented with a huge price cut ($60->$15) soon after its shoddy release and recovered spectacularly for it, doubling its average concurrent Steam users after a year (and Steam only represents a fraction of its users). Also see the reference I linked above about Valve experimenting with low prices years ago.
Streams and tournaments have been around without even getting notice from the current active playerbase, and yet you think this will draw random people in? Highly doubtful especially without a big budget, and definitely not running anything besides 1v1 power core mode where the game has some semblance of balance and depth. The upcoming event involves neither of those.
PrimaGoosa
Nostalgia is a hell of a drug. I remember having no idea what Dawn of War was when I received it as a gift, and being enthralled. It's completely unfair to compare that sensation when you were a completely different person in a completely different time of your life with reactions to the third installment of the series.
I firmly believe the strength of those feelings is what drives the hype culture that would rather imagine how good the next upcoming game is going to be than simply play and enjoy the current games that exist for what they are. Not that that game has to be DoW 3 if you really don't enjoy the mechanics, but it's really easy to look for what's wrong in a product and laser-focus on it while daydreaming about what will be right in the next shiny product.
What in the wide wide world of sports in DoW 3 is like StarCraft or C&C? What are you even thinking of when you say something like this?
KINE
Lets be real, DOW2 fans will not come over to DOW3 without remaking the game.
That aside, the average current RTS sale seems to hover around the 200k's
Battlefleet Gothic Armada 250k
Northgard 280k
Ultimate General Gettysburg 290k
Cossacks 3 230k
New blood gonna have to mean non DOW2 players. And 250k is about it.
Sure - the majority of those who already bought DOW3 were DOW2 players so there's still some new faces sitting on the sidelines out there but it's not gonna be in the millions of new blood suddenly interested in a new franchise.
We still have retention rate issues and low confidence around the product.
You could price DOW3 at USD20 but if people believe its a bad game, they wont buy.
Price elasticity works on normal items or those that people have no strong feelings or opinions on.
DOW3 is not that. This game has been labeled as Do Not Touch.
Price cut will only reinforce that perception.
Relic needs to restore confidence before anything else.
All said and done, Sega is partly owned by a multi Billion dollar company. Pretty sure they have really smart people worrying over pricing strategy.