P2P won't die. don't kid yourself GW2 looks very nice indeed but really until we see an actual game i won't say that P2P will die.
WaR looked good on paper, trailer seemed nice. And then i played it.....
And don't kid yourself this game is not Free 2 play you still need to fork 60-70$ to play it, you just don't have subscriptions. But like all F2P i'm willing to bet that to get past a certain point in game you'll need to play through the teeth to buy crap which in the end will be more expensive that anytyhing you would have paid monthly.
So ya you think F2P is the future, it might be but not good for the consumer. It's widely know that most people will end paying 5-10x more for F2P game then what they would have paid on subscription alone for same period of time.
NO game is EVER free to play no matter how much they want you to think so , cash shops rule these games with an iron fist that puts the people who are willing to pay a step ahead of anyone who doesn't put the cash in the shop. Not only that, no F2P game has came anywhere close to having the same amount of content/polish or Dev attention of any good P2P game(without paying for the content). In fact most F2P games are much much more expinsive to play than a P2P game if you want to compete with the top cash shop people or have access to all its features.
NO game is EVER free to play no matter how much they want you to think so , cash shops rule these games with an iron fist that puts the people who are willing to pay a step ahead of anyone who doesn't put the cash in the shop. Not only that, no F2P game has came anywhere close to having the same amount of content/polish or Dev attention of any good P2P game(without paying for the content). In fact most F2P games are much much more expinsive to play than a P2P game if you want to compete with the top cash shop people or have access to all its features.
DDO is 100% free if you dont whine about not getting everything handed to you instantly for free, you have to work a bit for it, but it is free.
Ive actually played several F2P games that are easily better quality and have more content than many of the supposed "good" or "high quality" P2P games weve seen the past fe wyears.
@ aaradun - i never said it was F2P, i know it is B2P (buy to play, but no sub). and no, at least in GW1, you do not ever need to buy anything to advance in anyway. sure you can get it faster by paying, but you dont have to do it.
Nah, all these games are still pay to play. They just tell everyone they are 'Free to play', but the reality is that they either block content unless you pay for it, restrict loads of stuff unless you pay for it, stick in an item store and nerf the normal gameplay so that it becomes a mindless borefest unless you purchase items etc.
Technically you can play for free, but for most people if you want any semblance of fun you end up paying for stuff. Infact many of these games are designed to prey on those with addictive personalities so that they end up spending far more than the usual monthly sub on a P2P game.
Sure, I suppose some people, maybe even many people quite like this 'Free to play'. Me, I'd rather pay for a box and a monthly sub. Guess I'm just old fashioned.
I agree wit OP,but im not sure this is what I personally like,I'd rather like to get sucked into one game and not beeing interested in any other game,like it was in the good old days:-)
I have nothing against paying 10-16 € per month for a game I loginto few times per week and do have real fun.
I think when many games switch to f2p then most people will have at least 2 games installed on their computers and might not get very involved in any one game. I did love the old days when you knew what hour of the day each guild member would login. Those were the days my friend!
You only Wish that F2P was going to take over. It will not, the next evolution is happening already. Monthly subs for a basic game framework with "Value added content" tacked on,.
Not to be the voice of reason or anything but GW 2 while it do well, plays to a vastly different audience and has no competition essentially it plays to the same audience as NWN (though on a bigger scale) in that its a lobby game with smaller places for people to play together.
No the next stage is MMOs that charge you for access to the servers and a core game, and then charge you for episodic content to play with friends (Similar to what EQ 2 already does but on a bigger scale).
After that comes the real genious which is a throw back to the old NWN. Design a toolkit like that one, charge people to access the servers to play the modules other people make, charge the other people to host the modules make them sign up to a code of conduct etc, and then throw in a few professional modules (Forgotten realms online anyone?) and basically you have a business model where you are being paid to have people play your game and being paid by people to have their content in your game. Essentially your content updates are delivered at minimal cost to you, and better still those people making the content pay you for the privelage.
All the while the cash shop, perk shop, RTM dress up store and "Value added services" such as browser based auctions and chat rake in the cash for you.
Its worse than the death of F2p, this is the gradual errosion of offline gaming, Ubisoft have started that with Assasins creed 2 and the settlers, in 10 years time there will be no box sales, no offline mode and no local saves.
You read it here first........ Forget nostradamus, Quote the K man instead.
Not to be the voice of reason or anything but GW 2 while it do well, plays to a vastly different audience and has no competition essentially it plays to the same audience as NWN (though on a bigger scale) in that its a lobby game with smaller places for people to play together.
Guild Wars 1 was like that i agree, basically more of a hub type game, kinda like Diablo2, and even Anet sai dthey do not consider it an MMORPG. However Guild Wars 2 (and this has to have been said at least 100 times in the past 2-3 weeks throughout this site) is nowhere near that same desgin, it will be a full blown MMORPG with an open & dynamic world (with some instancing for certain things), yet they are still keeping the Buy2Play model just like GW1.
Its worse than the death of F2p, this is the gradual errosion of offline gaming, Ubisoft have started that with Assasins creed 2 and the settlers, in 10 years time there will be no box sales, no offline mode and no local saves.
the gradual errosion of offline gaming is nothing new. fuck it the gradual errosion of offline computing is nothing new
Oh and a momentary reality check for all the F2P fanbois out there. None of these games "going" F2P were developed from the start as such. You can begin to tell me that the P2P model is dead in the US market the day a company releases a game designed, created and sold from the start as such. The start up costs of both DDO and LotRO were paid for by box sales off the shelf, paid expansions and many months of subscription customers before they were converted. Just because you can extend the lifespan of a older game that has already recouped or written off most of the dev cost doesn't mean you can make and sell a game from scatch as F2P that is worth playing.
I almost feel LotRO pulled the nuclear option on the MMO industry. LotRO is not DDO. DDO was on deaths door when they went free to play. LotRO is a AAA MMO with the second largest subscription base next to WoW. This is huge. No it is beyond HUGE. It is frikin Amegeddon. LotRO lobbed a virtual nuke at WoW, Eq2, Aion and every other game on the market. All other MMOs are going to have to respond in some way and probably by going free 2 play themselves. They won't have a choice in the matter.
We live in a capitalistic society where corporations are under obligation to return the greatest profits to their shareholders. They don't care about subscriptions or f2p all they care about is money and will go with whatever makes the most money. Blizzard is owned Activision and Turbine is owned by Time-Warner and both companies are beholden to Wall Street sharesholders. Wall Street will force these MMO companies to go along with f2p because it is the capitalist way. It has been proven time and time again that f2p brings in more money than subscriptions because lets face it the $14.99/mo sub is so 1999 and cash shops are more addicting than gambling on Sunday.
The OP is correct. It is bye-bye p2p though some are still in denial. By this time next year all p2p games will have gone f2p.
I'd rather quit the whole genre before accepting any form of f2p. I don't want to deal with the f2p crowd nor with a p2w game. If skill, dedication aren't enough to make you outstanding well you game failed. I know greedy companies only seeing the big $$$$ but Warnergreedy has to realise that DDO is whole different beast than Lotro so I hope it backfires and many former Lotro players will find a new home.
Lotro is MAYBE #3 behind Wow, Aion but for sure not #2
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play." "Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
Oh and a momentary reality check for all the F2P fanbois out there. None of these games "going" F2P were developed from the start as such. You can begin to tell me that the P2P model is dead in the US market the day a company releases a game designed, created and sold from the start as such. The start up costs of both DDO and LotRO were paid for by box sales off the shelf, paid expansions and many months of subscription customers before they were converted. Just because you can extend the lifespan of a older game that has already recouped or written off most of the dev cost doesn't mean you can make and sell a game from scatch as F2P that is worth playing.
Not worth playing in who's opinion? Yours? That's fine, there are millions and millions, including myself, who have the opposite opinion and have found some F2Ps worth playing. IMO, about 90% of the supposedly AAA P2P games launche din the past 5 years arent worth even $5 a month, but thats my own opinion f what is worth playing and what isnt. Ever wonder why people are willing to shell out sometimes hundreds and thousands of dollars on a monthly basis when they could just pay $15 a month instead? Becuase to them, the F2P game offers a better game to them than ANY P2P game out there. The people spending that money arent the casual "i want it now" people either, the people spending the most money also tend to play it more than most others and are very dedicated to the game.
Reality check for you: Your opinion does not = fact or the opinion of everyone else. If it did, we wouldn't even be having such discussions and F2P would not exist in the first place.
I agree. We've been hearing developers say that they're exploring "alternative payment methods." TOR hasn't decided yet, but if LotRO's plan works, we may very well see something similar. It seems like things are slowly starting to combine and mesh into (hopefully) something good. Themepark and sandbox, and now F2P vs. P2P. Of course, games like RuneScape have been doing it for years, but RuneScape isn't really worth playing unless you sub. I'd imagine any F2P/P2P hybrids will have a similar feeling, because the company is trying to get you to pay, after all. The F2P is just to get you in the door, but at the same time, it should feel like more than a free trial.
Tricky balance! WAR has its unlimited trial thing, which could be considered a step in the F2P direction anyways. Some of these older MMOs may start doing similar things. I know the boat's been rocked now, but let's wait for the waters to calm and see how well it works out for LotRO (since I do like the game, I hope it turns out to be a good idea).
Very common misconception used by a lot of people based on nothing but ignorance of the genre and usually limited to someones experience in just 1 or a few games a couple years ago, and hell many times used by people who have NEVER even played a F2P game and jsut assume it is true because that is what someone else who has no idea what theyre talking about said. I used to think the same way when I first started trying F2P games, but that is not the case anymore. Repeating ignorance repeatedly spoken by another ignorant person does not turn something into truth.
Reality check for you: Your opinion does not = fact or the opinion of everyone else. If it did, we wouldn't even be having such discussions and F2P would not exist in the first place.
Reading comprehension FTW...everyones post is an opinion unless citing some proof otherwise...Pointing out the reality of how both the Turbine games in question were developed *is* fact...you may not like it, since it does shoot some holes in the "F2P uber alles" mantra.
Just because plenty of so-called AAA titles have been flops doesn't mean they all were or that even a single F2P game has approached their standards of graphics, gameplay or content.
The "hybrid" model of selling customers boxes and long term subs to pay off start up investment and early hardware costs and then swapping to the "freemium" model when you start to downturn does seem to be gaining steam...but if you don't think it is a really shitty business practice, then by all means keep throwing money at them. (But you really should understand that the games won't be possible and won't exist without that initial crop of suckers to fund them)
The P2P model will still exist, you just now have the option of paying a subscription fee or paying on a per content basis. Both DDO and LotRO have subscription options that basically give you all the content you would need plus some extra stuff you can get via the item mall. A player who spends a ton in the item mall won't have a huge (if any) advantage over the subscription player. It's really just giving players more options and thus reeling in more customers. Now you can try a game beyond the trial period before you fork over a subscription fee, or if you are really casual and don't feel a subscription fee is worth your time you can make small microtransactions as you need to.
There are two downsides (I feel the upsides outweigh them) those being that it brings in a younger community and that it can make gameplay (especially future content) revolve around the need to use the item shop. The first one is pretty managable in a PvE game if you stick to your cliques and guilds and such that are more adult. The second can have a nasty effect on the industry, but I think if they make this too much the case current MMO subscribers are going to leave and not pay, so it's up to the company to decide how much they are going to try to milk their players anyway. Item malls still exist in most P2P games with subscriptions now, such as WoW, CO, STO, EQ2, even if they are purely cosmetic.
Reality check for you: Your opinion does not = fact or the opinion of everyone else. If it did, we wouldn't even be having such discussions and F2P would not exist in the first place.
Reading comprehension FTW...everyones post is an opinion unless citing some proof otherwise...Pointing out the reality of how both the Turbine games in question were developed *is* fact...you may not like it, since it does shoot some holes in the "F2P uber alles" mantra.
Just because plenty of so-called AAA titles have been flops doesn't mean they all were or that even a single F2P game has approached their standards of graphics, gameplay or content.
The "hybrid" model of selling customers boxes and long term subs to pay off start up investment and early hardware costs and then swapping to the "freemium" model when you start to downturn does seem to be gaining steam...but if you don't think it is a really shitty business practice, then by all means keep throwing money at them. (But you really should understand that the games won't be possible and won't exist without that initial crop of suckers to fund them)
Funny, cause nearly every F2P (that was something besides a korean grinder clone) released in the past 1-2 years has had not only nearly as good, if not better graphics than the majority of P2P games released in the past few years, but in many cases had loads more content in both size of the game and variety of things to do.
Just like you said, a bunch of bad P2P games doesnt mean they are ALL bad, same goes for F2P games. You cant judge an entire genre or payment model based on just a few games. Kind of strange how hypocritical people are about that.
This P2P game is horrible, but it doesn't mean they all suck VS This F2P game is horrible, so that definitely means they all suck **shakes head**
The P2P model will still exist, you just now have the option of paying a subscription fee or paying on a per content basis. Both DDO and LotRO have subscription options that basically give you all the content you would need plus some extra stuff you can get via the item mall. A player who spends a ton in the item mall won't have a huge (if any) advantage over the subscription player. It's really just giving players more options and thus reeling in more customers. Now you can try a game beyond the trial period before you fork over a subscription fee, or if you are really casual and don't feel a subscription fee is worth your time you can make small microtransactions as you need to.
There are two downsides (I feel the upsides outweigh them) those being that it brings in a younger community and that it can make gameplay (especially future content) revolve around the need to use the item shop. The first one is pretty managable in a PvE game if you stick to your cliques and guilds and such that are more adult. The second can have a nasty effect on the industry, but I think if they make this too much the case current MMO subscribers are going to leave and not pay, so it's up to the company to decide how much they are going to try to milk their players anyway. Item malls still exist in most P2P games with subscriptions now, such as WoW, CO, STO, EQ2, even if they are purely cosmetic.
Unless they stick free players on one server and subscribers on the other, I'll pass.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Free to play is just an option but it won't ever become a main stream option. F2P is a limited budget compared to subscription based games who can do alot more because they have alot more assets. People will gladly hand over a subscription payment for a worthy game. The problem now is finding a worthy game.
I almost feel LotRO pulled the nuclear option on the MMO industry. LotRO is not DDO. DDO was on deaths door when they went free to play. LotRO is a AAA MMO with the second largest subscription base next to WoW. This is huge. No it is beyond HUGE. It is frikin Amegeddon. LotRO lobbed a virtual nuke at WoW, Eq2, Aion and every other game on the market. All other MMOs are going to have to respond in some way and probably by going free 2 play themselves. They won't have a choice in the matter.
We live in a capitalistic society where corporations are under obligation to return the greatest profits to their shareholders. They don't care about subscriptions or f2p all they care about is money and will go with whatever makes the most money. Blizzard is owned Activision and Turbine is owned by Time-Warner and both companies are beholden to Wall Street sharesholders. Wall Street will force these MMO companies to go along with f2p because it is the capitalist way. It has been proven time and time again that f2p brings in more money than subscriptions because lets face it the $14.99/mo sub is so 1999 and cash shops are more addicting than gambling on Sunday.
The OP is correct. It is bye-bye p2p though some are still in denial. By this time next year all p2p games will have gone f2p.
LotRO is an AAA MMO yes, maybe 3rd or 4th.And really, LotRO has not drop any atomic bomb on WoW (and no i'm no fanboi) it will hurt the other MMO (War, EQ2 maybe, Conan). But it will not put a dent on WoW. People play wow mainly for the people and i don't see a lot of people leaving wow for LOTR a lot left and most came back.
If they can charge every player $15 a month, $50 for the box and $50 per expansion they will. If they can get you to pay $5 for a for show pet, or house items, or appearance only outfits, they will do it. Can we think of any games that would do all of the above? Hmm its a very, very populair game too.
We all forget that these are business, people make their living making them, and they require a huge amount of money to be spent over a very long period of time, with no return for investors, as they develop the games.
There is a reason games move from p2p to f2p, they cant convice enough people to pay a monthly fee to play, its either go down to a skeleton server and support a niche crowd, no development, or go f2p and hope that a small minority will pay big money to get an edge over others. f2p games that dont milk their community (usually by adding fustrating elements into the game, and the ability to remove them for a price, or out right character advantages) My favorite is starting with a small inventory/tiny warehouse, then giving new characters cash shop items to clog up that space, of course offering extra space for what amounts to $5-$15 a month. Those are the games that really make decent money and they are the worst of the f2p games.
Other games take a hybrid route, Anarch Online offers the origional content free, and for a normal subscription you get access to expansions for faster leveling and much better equipment. So the origional content has a population, and so does the expansion content. Without f2p the origional content would be empty for anyone wishing to do it.
To think that a few games going f2p signals the death of the p2p model is qute a stretch, from the business side of it, and seems more wishful thinking from a budget gamer.
Remeber if mercedes could charge you $1,300,000 for a car they would , that is how the world works, if they can get people to buy it they will charge as much as possible for it.
Funny, cause nearly every F2P (that was something besides a korean grinder clone) released in the past 1-2 years has had not only nearly as good, if not better graphics than the majority of P2P games released in the past few years, but in many cases had loads more content in both size of the game and variety of things to do.
Graphics I will grant you...."...many cases had loads more content..."...I won't. Not unless you're going to name them and show that they launched with anything like the content that even small-fry like Fallen Earth had at launch.
While we're on that hypocrisy thing though, why is it that so many fans of F2P games insist that their games are the wave of the future and start endless threads about how outdated P2P is or how it going to be replaced?? I mean seriously, I dislike F2P...so I don't play them; I don't start threads saying the business model doesn't work or is going to fail...I don't troll around looking for the next bit of news that I can claim is "proof" that they all suck, are populated massively by bots and spammers or are going to close...
Pay to Play isn't nowhere near dying. All these low rent games going free to play means those developers with games worthy of a subscription will draw from the pool of people who refuse to be nickel and dimed, while all the free to plays will struggle to grab a small chunk of the free to play kiddies, cash shop whores, and "I'm a casual player so I shouldn't have to play the game to get my stuff, I want it NOW" people. Every new ftp game that comes out spreads those customers even further. Too many products and not enough people to play them all will be the downfall of free to play games.
There's a reason the standard monthly sub came to be. Now you all have fun living in the past of AOL and Compuserve and the rest of us will stay here in the present, and move into the future, without you.
Considering that all the big P2P MMOs are already nickel and diming their players (See WoW, all SOE and Cryptic games) I dont see the problem with F2Ps doing it, atleast you get the choice to not pay!
I agree with Lobotomist and I have said for a long time that monthly sub as only option for MMOs will be gone in a few years and this is great news for us players. Hybrids like DDO/LotrO and GW2 is the only way going forward and we are the winners.
If WoW = The Beatles and WAR = Led Zeppelin Then LotrO = Pink Floyd
Comments
P2P won't die. don't kid yourself GW2 looks very nice indeed but really until we see an actual game i won't say that P2P will die.
WaR looked good on paper, trailer seemed nice. And then i played it.....
And don't kid yourself this game is not Free 2 play you still need to fork 60-70$ to play it, you just don't have subscriptions. But like all F2P i'm willing to bet that to get past a certain point in game you'll need to play through the teeth to buy crap which in the end will be more expensive that anytyhing you would have paid monthly.
So ya you think F2P is the future, it might be but not good for the consumer. It's widely know that most people will end paying 5-10x more for F2P game then what they would have paid on subscription alone for same period of time.
NO game is EVER free to play no matter how much they want you to think so , cash shops rule these games with an iron fist that puts the people who are willing to pay a step ahead of anyone who doesn't put the cash in the shop. Not only that, no F2P game has came anywhere close to having the same amount of content/polish or Dev attention of any good P2P game(without paying for the content). In fact most F2P games are much much more expinsive to play than a P2P game if you want to compete with the top cash shop people or have access to all its features.
DDO is 100% free if you dont whine about not getting everything handed to you instantly for free, you have to work a bit for it, but it is free.
Ive actually played several F2P games that are easily better quality and have more content than many of the supposed "good" or "high quality" P2P games weve seen the past fe wyears.
@ aaradun - i never said it was F2P, i know it is B2P (buy to play, but no sub). and no, at least in GW1, you do not ever need to buy anything to advance in anyway. sure you can get it faster by paying, but you dont have to do it.
I laughed a little
Nah, all these games are still pay to play. They just tell everyone they are 'Free to play', but the reality is that they either block content unless you pay for it, restrict loads of stuff unless you pay for it, stick in an item store and nerf the normal gameplay so that it becomes a mindless borefest unless you purchase items etc.
Technically you can play for free, but for most people if you want any semblance of fun you end up paying for stuff. Infact many of these games are designed to prey on those with addictive personalities so that they end up spending far more than the usual monthly sub on a P2P game.
Sure, I suppose some people, maybe even many people quite like this 'Free to play'. Me, I'd rather pay for a box and a monthly sub. Guess I'm just old fashioned.
I agree wit OP,but im not sure this is what I personally like,I'd rather like to get sucked into one game and not beeing interested in any other game,like it was in the good old days:-)
I have nothing against paying 10-16 € per month for a game I loginto few times per week and do have real fun.
I think when many games switch to f2p then most people will have at least 2 games installed on their computers and might not get very involved in any one game. I did love the old days when you knew what hour of the day each guild member would login. Those were the days my friend!
You only Wish that F2P was going to take over. It will not, the next evolution is happening already. Monthly subs for a basic game framework with "Value added content" tacked on,.
Not to be the voice of reason or anything but GW 2 while it do well, plays to a vastly different audience and has no competition essentially it plays to the same audience as NWN (though on a bigger scale) in that its a lobby game with smaller places for people to play together.
No the next stage is MMOs that charge you for access to the servers and a core game, and then charge you for episodic content to play with friends (Similar to what EQ 2 already does but on a bigger scale).
After that comes the real genious which is a throw back to the old NWN. Design a toolkit like that one, charge people to access the servers to play the modules other people make, charge the other people to host the modules make them sign up to a code of conduct etc, and then throw in a few professional modules (Forgotten realms online anyone?) and basically you have a business model where you are being paid to have people play your game and being paid by people to have their content in your game. Essentially your content updates are delivered at minimal cost to you, and better still those people making the content pay you for the privelage.
All the while the cash shop, perk shop, RTM dress up store and "Value added services" such as browser based auctions and chat rake in the cash for you.
Its worse than the death of F2p, this is the gradual errosion of offline gaming, Ubisoft have started that with Assasins creed 2 and the settlers, in 10 years time there will be no box sales, no offline mode and no local saves.
You read it here first........ Forget nostradamus, Quote the K man instead.
Guild Wars 1 was like that i agree, basically more of a hub type game, kinda like Diablo2, and even Anet sai dthey do not consider it an MMORPG. However Guild Wars 2 (and this has to have been said at least 100 times in the past 2-3 weeks throughout this site) is nowhere near that same desgin, it will be a full blown MMORPG with an open & dynamic world (with some instancing for certain things), yet they are still keeping the Buy2Play model just like GW1.
the gradual errosion of offline gaming is nothing new. fuck it the gradual errosion of offline computing is nothing new
Oh and a momentary reality check for all the F2P fanbois out there. None of these games "going" F2P were developed from the start as such. You can begin to tell me that the P2P model is dead in the US market the day a company releases a game designed, created and sold from the start as such. The start up costs of both DDO and LotRO were paid for by box sales off the shelf, paid expansions and many months of subscription customers before they were converted. Just because you can extend the lifespan of a older game that has already recouped or written off most of the dev cost doesn't mean you can make and sell a game from scatch as F2P that is worth playing.
I almost feel LotRO pulled the nuclear option on the MMO industry. LotRO is not DDO. DDO was on deaths door when they went free to play. LotRO is a AAA MMO with the second largest subscription base next to WoW. This is huge. No it is beyond HUGE. It is frikin Amegeddon. LotRO lobbed a virtual nuke at WoW, Eq2, Aion and every other game on the market. All other MMOs are going to have to respond in some way and probably by going free 2 play themselves. They won't have a choice in the matter.
We live in a capitalistic society where corporations are under obligation to return the greatest profits to their shareholders. They don't care about subscriptions or f2p all they care about is money and will go with whatever makes the most money. Blizzard is owned Activision and Turbine is owned by Time-Warner and both companies are beholden to Wall Street sharesholders. Wall Street will force these MMO companies to go along with f2p because it is the capitalist way. It has been proven time and time again that f2p brings in more money than subscriptions because lets face it the $14.99/mo sub is so 1999 and cash shops are more addicting than gambling on Sunday.
The OP is correct. It is bye-bye p2p though some are still in denial. By this time next year all p2p games will have gone f2p.
f2p = basically p2w (pay to win)
I'd rather quit the whole genre before accepting any form of f2p. I don't want to deal with the f2p crowd nor with a p2w game. If skill, dedication aren't enough to make you outstanding well you game failed. I know greedy companies only seeing the big $$$$ but Warnergreedy has to realise that DDO is whole different beast than Lotro so I hope it backfires and many former Lotro players will find a new home.
Lotro is MAYBE #3 behind Wow, Aion but for sure not #2
We need a MMORPG Cataclysm asap, finish the dark age of MMORPGS now!
"Everything you're bitching about is wrong. People don't have the time to invest in corpse runs, impossible zones, or long winded quests. Sometimes, they just want to pop on and play."
"Then maybe MMORPGs aren't for you."
Not worth playing in who's opinion? Yours? That's fine, there are millions and millions, including myself, who have the opposite opinion and have found some F2Ps worth playing. IMO, about 90% of the supposedly AAA P2P games launche din the past 5 years arent worth even $5 a month, but thats my own opinion f what is worth playing and what isnt. Ever wonder why people are willing to shell out sometimes hundreds and thousands of dollars on a monthly basis when they could just pay $15 a month instead? Becuase to them, the F2P game offers a better game to them than ANY P2P game out there. The people spending that money arent the casual "i want it now" people either, the people spending the most money also tend to play it more than most others and are very dedicated to the game.
Reality check for you: Your opinion does not = fact or the opinion of everyone else. If it did, we wouldn't even be having such discussions and F2P would not exist in the first place.
Woo a nice thread from Lobo!
I agree. We've been hearing developers say that they're exploring "alternative payment methods." TOR hasn't decided yet, but if LotRO's plan works, we may very well see something similar. It seems like things are slowly starting to combine and mesh into (hopefully) something good. Themepark and sandbox, and now F2P vs. P2P. Of course, games like RuneScape have been doing it for years, but RuneScape isn't really worth playing unless you sub. I'd imagine any F2P/P2P hybrids will have a similar feeling, because the company is trying to get you to pay, after all. The F2P is just to get you in the door, but at the same time, it should feel like more than a free trial.
Tricky balance! WAR has its unlimited trial thing, which could be considered a step in the F2P direction anyways. Some of these older MMOs may start doing similar things. I know the boat's been rocked now, but let's wait for the waters to calm and see how well it works out for LotRO (since I do like the game, I hope it turns out to be a good idea).
Very common misconception used by a lot of people based on nothing but ignorance of the genre and usually limited to someones experience in just 1 or a few games a couple years ago, and hell many times used by people who have NEVER even played a F2P game and jsut assume it is true because that is what someone else who has no idea what theyre talking about said. I used to think the same way when I first started trying F2P games, but that is not the case anymore. Repeating ignorance repeatedly spoken by another ignorant person does not turn something into truth.
Reading comprehension FTW...everyones post is an opinion unless citing some proof otherwise...Pointing out the reality of how both the Turbine games in question were developed *is* fact...you may not like it, since it does shoot some holes in the "F2P uber alles" mantra.
Just because plenty of so-called AAA titles have been flops doesn't mean they all were or that even a single F2P game has approached their standards of graphics, gameplay or content.
The "hybrid" model of selling customers boxes and long term subs to pay off start up investment and early hardware costs and then swapping to the "freemium" model when you start to downturn does seem to be gaining steam...but if you don't think it is a really shitty business practice, then by all means keep throwing money at them. (But you really should understand that the games won't be possible and won't exist without that initial crop of suckers to fund them)
The P2P model will still exist, you just now have the option of paying a subscription fee or paying on a per content basis. Both DDO and LotRO have subscription options that basically give you all the content you would need plus some extra stuff you can get via the item mall. A player who spends a ton in the item mall won't have a huge (if any) advantage over the subscription player. It's really just giving players more options and thus reeling in more customers. Now you can try a game beyond the trial period before you fork over a subscription fee, or if you are really casual and don't feel a subscription fee is worth your time you can make small microtransactions as you need to.
There are two downsides (I feel the upsides outweigh them) those being that it brings in a younger community and that it can make gameplay (especially future content) revolve around the need to use the item shop. The first one is pretty managable in a PvE game if you stick to your cliques and guilds and such that are more adult. The second can have a nasty effect on the industry, but I think if they make this too much the case current MMO subscribers are going to leave and not pay, so it's up to the company to decide how much they are going to try to milk their players anyway. Item malls still exist in most P2P games with subscriptions now, such as WoW, CO, STO, EQ2, even if they are purely cosmetic.
Funny, cause nearly every F2P (that was something besides a korean grinder clone) released in the past 1-2 years has had not only nearly as good, if not better graphics than the majority of P2P games released in the past few years, but in many cases had loads more content in both size of the game and variety of things to do.
Just like you said, a bunch of bad P2P games doesnt mean they are ALL bad, same goes for F2P games. You cant judge an entire genre or payment model based on just a few games. Kind of strange how hypocritical people are about that.
This P2P game is horrible, but it doesn't mean they all suck VS This F2P game is horrible, so that definitely means they all suck **shakes head**
F2p is basically the norm in the east.
Out of our top 50 MMO here. 46 is F2p.
I wouldn't say P2P will be gone though. The bigger studio is probably still going to be P2P, since that's the prefered model for most player.
Unless they stick free players on one server and subscribers on the other, I'll pass.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Free to play is just an option but it won't ever become a main stream option. F2P is a limited budget compared to subscription based games who can do alot more because they have alot more assets. People will gladly hand over a subscription payment for a worthy game. The problem now is finding a worthy game.
LotRO is an AAA MMO yes, maybe 3rd or 4th.And really, LotRO has not drop any atomic bomb on WoW (and no i'm no fanboi) it will hurt the other MMO (War, EQ2 maybe, Conan). But it will not put a dent on WoW. People play wow mainly for the people and i don't see a lot of people leaving wow for LOTR a lot left and most came back.
If they can charge every player $15 a month, $50 for the box and $50 per expansion they will. If they can get you to pay $5 for a for show pet, or house items, or appearance only outfits, they will do it. Can we think of any games that would do all of the above? Hmm its a very, very populair game too.
We all forget that these are business, people make their living making them, and they require a huge amount of money to be spent over a very long period of time, with no return for investors, as they develop the games.
There is a reason games move from p2p to f2p, they cant convice enough people to pay a monthly fee to play, its either go down to a skeleton server and support a niche crowd, no development, or go f2p and hope that a small minority will pay big money to get an edge over others. f2p games that dont milk their community (usually by adding fustrating elements into the game, and the ability to remove them for a price, or out right character advantages) My favorite is starting with a small inventory/tiny warehouse, then giving new characters cash shop items to clog up that space, of course offering extra space for what amounts to $5-$15 a month. Those are the games that really make decent money and they are the worst of the f2p games.
Other games take a hybrid route, Anarch Online offers the origional content free, and for a normal subscription you get access to expansions for faster leveling and much better equipment. So the origional content has a population, and so does the expansion content. Without f2p the origional content would be empty for anyone wishing to do it.
To think that a few games going f2p signals the death of the p2p model is qute a stretch, from the business side of it, and seems more wishful thinking from a budget gamer.
Remeber if mercedes could charge you $1,300,000 for a car they would , that is how the world works, if they can get people to buy it they will charge as much as possible for it.
http://www.edmunds.com/new/2010/maybach/landaulet/101320297/prices.html?action=1
Graphics I will grant you...."...many cases had loads more content..."...I won't. Not unless you're going to name them and show that they launched with anything like the content that even small-fry like Fallen Earth had at launch.
While we're on that hypocrisy thing though, why is it that so many fans of F2P games insist that their games are the wave of the future and start endless threads about how outdated P2P is or how it going to be replaced?? I mean seriously, I dislike F2P...so I don't play them; I don't start threads saying the business model doesn't work or is going to fail...I don't troll around looking for the next bit of news that I can claim is "proof" that they all suck, are populated massively by bots and spammers or are going to close...
Considering that all the big P2P MMOs are already nickel and diming their players (See WoW, all SOE and Cryptic games) I dont see the problem with F2Ps doing it, atleast you get the choice to not pay!
I agree with Lobotomist and I have said for a long time that monthly sub as only option for MMOs will be gone in a few years and this is great news for us players. Hybrids like DDO/LotrO and GW2 is the only way going forward and we are the winners.
If WoW = The Beatles
and WAR = Led Zeppelin
Then LotrO = Pink Floyd