all i see are some opinions from some self announced mmo market analytics...
now listen:
NOBODY can tell how succesfull a game will become!! its like playing lottery for the developers/publishers.
just look at gpotato or blizzard.
p2p vs f2p.
both dooing very very well!
Now there is a bit of sense. Agree totally.
And now for something completely different.... (sorry)
What about pay as you go? Say, 25c an hour for connect time. Probably not used because of the administration cost, but that is speculation on my part. Shall we start a flame war about something that doesn't exist yet? Yee haw! I would like not having to pay when I am not playing. There are probably other payment methods possible, too tired to think of any atm.
Hey, its about quality vs time/money spent. Is there any other way to value anything?
This thread, as many others before, seems to be about two groups of people. Those who think FTP is an evil plot and that anyone who doesn't agree, like Richard, is a shill for the industry or just ignorant. (If I was to criticize this article it would probably be along the lines of stating the obvious. But the real motivation I expect is just to light that very trusty old powder keg. It works.) And the other group who say, why the fuss. I like choices. What I don't like is people suggesting I shouldn't have a choice, even if I am not interested in exercising it in a particular case, because they know better.
F2P is a time tested business model. It is simply a beefed up version of the free trial. Yea, everyone could stick with just the free version, but the reality is that there is a lot of money to be made in the upsell.
Lets give some (non gaming) examples of this:
Email.
Hotmail, GMail, Yahoo Mail. These all use the same basic business model as F2P. Give out a free versoin, then make money on the backend. The email market has changed a lot over time. From per message fees, to monthly fees, to free (with premium options). You can see much of the same issues that we have in gaming, in the email market.
AntiVirus.
You can see the same thing here. Free versions are common, but they want to sell you on the 'better' version. They have differnt methods of doing this, but they all follow the same basic F2P prinicpal. Try us for free, if you like us, we offer better stuff for money.
As can be seen in these markets, there is a place for P2P and F2P. However as the market becomes more competitive, F2P gains a larger share, even if it does not make the most money.
Originally posted by Giddian That seemed to be a very opinionated reply, Don't agree 100%. Guild Wars has to be the Best F2P game I have seen. DDO may not have started as a F2P, but their version of F2P should set a standard. As far as it being good or bad, thats opinionated once again. I personaly think that the way its set up confuses some and drives them away befor they actualy tried it. As far as Devs leaving to make Facebook games, I have no Idea were that came from. F2P with the Option of Sub, is the way it should go. Buy the content you wish to add. Subs get it for free. Great concept. don't need it to play the game or advance as high as any one else, but added content makes it more fun.
It seems that people have very funny concepts about F2P.
It could easily be stated the WAR, AOC or even to a limited extend WoW are F2P... but that Guild Wars is P2P.
F2P or P2P only comes into effect at the initial point of sale. If you can get the game (and an account to play it with ) for Free, then you have met the requirements for F2P. Guild Wars is the EXACT OPPOSITE of this, where you HAVE to pay upfront.
Once you get past the initial purchase, you have many options. This includes monthly fees, microtransactions, advertisement, limited acess, etc... but all of these can apply to a F2P or P2P game, because they are just the way money is made after the 'free'. Most new games are offering hybrid payment options, that include multiple of these, so that they can get the advantages of each.
This thread, as many others before, seems to be about two groups of people. Those who think FTP is an evil plot and that anyone who doesn't agree, like Richard, is a shill for the industry or just ignorant. (If I was to criticize this article it would probably be along the lines of stating the obvious. But the real motivation I expect is just to light that very trusty old powder keg. It works.) And the other group who say, why the fuss.
Way to try and turn the whole situation backwards there ...
I have NEVER started a thread criticizing or commenting on the F2P market or any game in it. I don't waste my time bashing the genre or specific games in it, because I just do not care. That's not because I am ignorant, bigoted or in denial. I've played some in the past, didn't find them very satisfying and moved on.
Richard (and others) have recently been on this absolute crusade promoting the F2P business model as the only way forward for the MMO industry. I (and a great many others) have disagreed; rather than refute a single argument raised, he has consistently belittled those he disagrees with and accused them of various mental defects or disorders.
At the same time, his columns are generally lacking in any analytic content and mostly resemble press releases from the various F2P companies he is talking about, or are just troll bait. He doesn't deserve the headliner status he gets here.
I don't have any real position on free to play one way or another. I just find it strange that that this and other articles here seem to push the concept so much. It' just seems strange.
Thinking back over the last few months, the advertisements I've seen on mmorpg.com have been: AoC, EVE, DA:O (not even a mmo), and lots and lots of F2P games (including DDO).
Only time I recall seeing LOTRO advertised was around the time of its last expansion pack being released.
I don't recall seeing advertisements for WoW (which doesn't really need to advertise here, its target demographic is different), EQ or the other big names. Don't recall any for WAR for that matter.
So from that, I can assume that F2P games are more willing to advertise than P2P. I don't frequent other mmo-centric sites much, but I assume their advertisement is similar.
All those that dislike the F2P sphere should rejoice in this: A chunk of the revenue the F2P games are milking from their dupes--err, players--is being spent as advertisements at sites full of people that don't care about F2P!
The anti-F2P players should be getting together, form a coalition, and encourage F2P games to advertise in more venues with the wrong demographic, thus creating even more of a strain on their revenue model, decreasing their profit, and pushing F2P to a much earlier game than could otherwise be hoped!
developers should get real and call what it really is "Free to play , pay to win" I've been burnt too many times by bad MMOs so my new rules are: 1) play trial before buying. 2) don't buy extras until the game has proven successful.
I own 10 or more copies of MMO games I'll never play again at 30$ to 60$ each. what a waste.
i think 1 and 2 are pretty much common sense tbh, and most MMO's will have a reasonably good free trial period anything from 7 days to 2 weeks - although AoC recently bucked that particular trend by having an 'unlimited' free trial, levels 1 to 20 unlimited time free trial.. and i think WAR also did something similar although im not 100 percent on the details... the thing is, MMO's generally dont rely on boxed sales but monthly subs, so a free trial is their 'bait' to get you hooked.. and if its a good enough game, why not. anything less kind of implies that they themselves are not that confident of player retention...
Comments
Now there is a bit of sense. Agree totally.
And now for something completely different.... (sorry)
What about pay as you go? Say, 25c an hour for connect time. Probably not used because of the administration cost, but that is speculation on my part. Shall we start a flame war about something that doesn't exist yet? Yee haw! I would like not having to pay when I am not playing. There are probably other payment methods possible, too tired to think of any atm.
Hey, its about quality vs time/money spent. Is there any other way to value anything?
This thread, as many others before, seems to be about two groups of people. Those who think FTP is an evil plot and that anyone who doesn't agree, like Richard, is a shill for the industry or just ignorant. (If I was to criticize this article it would probably be along the lines of stating the obvious. But the real motivation I expect is just to light that very trusty old powder keg. It works.) And the other group who say, why the fuss. I like choices. What I don't like is people suggesting I shouldn't have a choice, even if I am not interested in exercising it in a particular case, because they know better.
---------------------------
Rose-lipped maidens,
Light-foot lads...
F2P is a time tested business model. It is simply a beefed up version of the free trial. Yea, everyone could stick with just the free version, but the reality is that there is a lot of money to be made in the upsell.
Lets give some (non gaming) examples of this:
Email.
Hotmail, GMail, Yahoo Mail. These all use the same basic business model as F2P. Give out a free versoin, then make money on the backend. The email market has changed a lot over time. From per message fees, to monthly fees, to free (with premium options). You can see much of the same issues that we have in gaming, in the email market.
AntiVirus.
You can see the same thing here. Free versions are common, but they want to sell you on the 'better' version. They have differnt methods of doing this, but they all follow the same basic F2P prinicpal. Try us for free, if you like us, we offer better stuff for money.
As can be seen in these markets, there is a place for P2P and F2P. However as the market becomes more competitive, F2P gains a larger share, even if it does not make the most money.
It seems that people have very funny concepts about F2P.
It could easily be stated the WAR, AOC or even to a limited extend WoW are F2P... but that Guild Wars is P2P.
F2P or P2P only comes into effect at the initial point of sale. If you can get the game (and an account to play it with ) for Free, then you have met the requirements for F2P. Guild Wars is the EXACT OPPOSITE of this, where you HAVE to pay upfront.
Once you get past the initial purchase, you have many options. This includes monthly fees, microtransactions, advertisement, limited acess, etc... but all of these can apply to a F2P or P2P game, because they are just the way money is made after the 'free'. Most new games are offering hybrid payment options, that include multiple of these, so that they can get the advantages of each.
Umm. Gw had no monthly fees. <--period.
Way to try and turn the whole situation backwards there ...
I have NEVER started a thread criticizing or commenting on the F2P market or any game in it. I don't waste my time bashing the genre or specific games in it, because I just do not care. That's not because I am ignorant, bigoted or in denial. I've played some in the past, didn't find them very satisfying and moved on.
Richard (and others) have recently been on this absolute crusade promoting the F2P business model as the only way forward for the MMO industry. I (and a great many others) have disagreed; rather than refute a single argument raised, he has consistently belittled those he disagrees with and accused them of various mental defects or disorders.
At the same time, his columns are generally lacking in any analytic content and mostly resemble press releases from the various F2P companies he is talking about, or are just troll bait. He doesn't deserve the headliner status he gets here.
I don't have any real position on free to play one way or another. I just find it strange that that this and other articles here seem to push the concept so much. It' just seems strange.
developers should get real and call what it really is "Free to play , pay to win"
I've been burnt too many times by bad MMOs
so my new rules are:
1) play trial before buying.
2) don't buy extras until the game has proven successful.
I own 10 or more copies of MMO games I'll never play again at 30$ to 60$ each.
what a waste.
Thinking back over the last few months, the advertisements I've seen on mmorpg.com have been: AoC, EVE, DA:O (not even a mmo), and lots and lots of F2P games (including DDO).
Only time I recall seeing LOTRO advertised was around the time of its last expansion pack being released.
I don't recall seeing advertisements for WoW (which doesn't really need to advertise here, its target demographic is different), EQ or the other big names. Don't recall any for WAR for that matter.
So from that, I can assume that F2P games are more willing to advertise than P2P. I don't frequent other mmo-centric sites much, but I assume their advertisement is similar.
All those that dislike the F2P sphere should rejoice in this: A chunk of the revenue the F2P games are milking from their dupes--err, players--is being spent as advertisements at sites full of people that don't care about F2P!
The anti-F2P players should be getting together, form a coalition, and encourage F2P games to advertise in more venues with the wrong demographic, thus creating even more of a strain on their revenue model, decreasing their profit, and pushing F2P to a much earlier game than could otherwise be hoped!
-w
i think 1 and 2 are pretty much common sense tbh, and most MMO's will have a reasonably good free trial period anything from 7 days to 2 weeks - although AoC recently bucked that particular trend by having an 'unlimited' free trial, levels 1 to 20 unlimited time free trial.. and i think WAR also did something similar although im not 100 percent on the details... the thing is, MMO's generally dont rely on boxed sales but monthly subs, so a free trial is their 'bait' to get you hooked.. and if its a good enough game, why not. anything less kind of implies that they themselves are not that confident of player retention...