12-07-2009, 10:13 AM
Fretty Wrote:Also, if they create a game that lasts that long, the company gains a good reputation from it for making a quality product (because if it didn't have quality, it wouldn't last that long), and therefor stands to receive great anticipation for their next launch of a game (almost ensuring the initial sales of said game will be great, despite the quality it offers).Yeah, I think it's a reputation thing. It's basically what Blizzard was built on. Coming up with battle.net didn't make Blizzard any money directly but it sure got them a reputation for good multiplayer gameplay. Starcraft 2 is going to make them like a billion dollars mainly because (I think) they've got a reputation for delivering not just good gameplay but extended gameplay by having a good, free matchmaking service.
By contrast, I'm dubious of EA games because their integrated matchmaking and ladder system is usually through Gamespy and it's unreliable, and whenever there's a problem, EA and Gamespy just point fingers at each other.
Free to play is a money making model based on selling future games. Few companies seem to have the foresight to realize this.
(Not that I think MMOGs can or should use this model, but online matchmaking services can't possibly cost very much to run.)