Originally posted by ericbelser Well, all I can say is that I hope you are wrong...but at least if you are right I can look forward to all my time being free for other hobbies again....as I won't play F2P games.
You are really going to have to learn to stop seeing labels on everything. This goes for EVERYONE. "F2P" will now mean something completely different. It can't be used the way it has been. Especially with triple AAA games that still offer a subscription model just now with this new hybrid of ftp/subscriber model that Turbine is instituting.
We all know WAR, POTBS, Vanguard ... would surely benefit. And are probably first ones to follow.
Don't forget the likes of The Chronicles of Spellborn!
SOE should really consider switching Vanguard over to F2P as a latch-ditch attempt at reviving it. It'd attract more people to the game, they'd probably start making some more money, which means they could hire more devs to get the ball rolling faster, and they may just save it.
I would absolutely love it if Tabula Rasa resurfaced as a F2P game too, might I add.
Well it's premature to herald P2P's end, and even if P2P is ending it'll die a very slow death (the death of EQ1 or UO...oh wait, they're both still around!)
But F2P definitely has more potential strengths than weaknesses.
Honestly the common F2P-hate nowadays is no different from the P2P-hate that occurred when the first MMORPGs started using it as payment method. Now look at the loyalty to P2P, heh.
I will agree with this P2P is going anywhere,People will always want to make the ungodly amount money of that WoW made.I will say the future is mixture of P2P and F2P.Hybrid models give the best of both worlds.
My personally i have always said that buy to play(guild wars model) is format.The game has a box and primarly make it money from box sales( like every other video game) and if they need or chose to open a cash shop it does not need to be like the ones we see now those cash shops are primary and only source of income for the game.They have no choice but to maximize what they get in the cash shop.
Baloney. I'm not saying P2P will not have a future, but F2P seems to be a valid business model as well.
Turbine says they've seen an increase of 500% on their cash revenue for DDO since going F2P, someone mentioned that the subscriber numbers for DD (that's people still paying rather than only playing F2P) have doubled since as well.
ArenaNet will release their hugely anticipated GW2 the same as GW as well, F2P: only buying the game, then being able to play it sub-free. With the enormous interest in GW2 and the good reputation of ANet they didn't have to do it, they could easily make it a P2P game. Still, apparently after having experience with this model with GW they're convinced they can make a non-P2P model work for them.
Good move for the polished industry, more diversity in payment models catered to your taste.
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
-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.-
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Your first paragraph makes absolutely NO sense. If the D&D population doubled, but their revenue increased by 500%, that means the average player is now spending MORE than the previous $15/month subscription fee. So much for "no one thought their game was worth $15 a month..."
And furthermore, I suggest you go inform yourself heavily as to the workings of Guild Wars 2, as if you'd even have read an ounce of information about the game you'd know that it is going to have a fully persistent world unlike its predecessor. And its quest system is anything but linear.
Seriously, if you're going to rant at least do it from an informed perspective otherwise you just end up embarrassing yourself.
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Your first paragraph makes absolutely NO sense. If the D&D population doubled, but their revenue increased by 500%, that means the average player is now spending MORE than the previous $15/month subscription fee. So much for "no one thought their game was worth $15 a month..."
And furthermore, I suggest you go inform yourself heavily as to the workings of Guild Wars 2, as if you'd even have read an ounce of information about the game you'd know that it is going to have a fully persistent world unlike its predecessor. And its quest system is anything but linear.
Seriously, if you're going to rant at least do it from an informed perspective otherwise you just end up embarrassing yourself.
First off, there is nothing wrong with my first statement. If the game was worth $15, they'd have still been charging $15 and threw the item shop on top of it, like SOE. Second, I'm willing to bet that 500% increase ( which, by the way, is the devs claim and in no way verifiable ) comes from a SMALL portion of the players buying the MOST stuff. Players who otherwise wouldn't be there because they wouldn't pay $15 a month for the little DDO had to offer.
And I was speaking in terms of an already released game (GW).I misread the quote I responded to.
-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.-
Yes, Guild Wars 2 doesn't have a subscription and that makes the game free to play.
However.
There are no item shops like you see in DDO or Lotor. If I'm not mistaken, people seem to categorize item shop games as F2P.
But since GW2 doesn't have one I think the game should fall under B2P (buy to play.)
That right there is the way for future MMOs to go.
Imagine it...WoW without a monthly sub AND no item shop. You just buy the game, install and play all you want! How awesome is that?
I can say though, that I will never ever play an MMO with item shop. If Guild Wars ever adobted an item shop, then it's buy buy from me. I hate F2P/Item shop.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Hey, wake up and smell the future: the hugely hyped (overhyped? Depends on who you ask) GW2 will be a non-P2P MMO too. And yes, it won't be linear.
God, you gotta love ANet, they're trying to prove so many beliefs and iron rules in the MMO market to be ridiculous or just excuses.
No, I'm not saying P2P has become obsolete, only that F2P doesn't mean a MMO is low quality or walking on its last legs.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Hey, wake up and smell the future: the hugely hyped (overhyped? Depends on who you ask) GW2 will be a non-P2P MMO too. And yes, it won't be linear.
God, you gotta love ANet, they're trying to prove so many beliefs and iron rules in the MMO market to be ridiculous or just excuses.
No, I'm not saying P2P has become obsolete, only that F2P doesn't mean a MMO is low quality or walking on its last legs.
I don't think Guild Wars should be classified as F2P. As most all F2P games out there have item shops, and guild wars does not.
Imagine it...WoW without a monthly sub AND no item shop. You just buy the game, install and play all you want! How awesome is that?
Yes, it would be awesome. But WoW has a sub AND a service/itemshop (well, at least the start of something like that), that's the reality.
I guess it's up to ANet and other companies like it to prove that other payment models can be financially healthy and profitable without resorting to company greed.
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums: Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
We may not like it, but the OP is right on the money, and I think anyone who's been keeping up with the news knows the change is unavoidable. Most of the big names in the industry have been either hinting or outright saying online gaming is going the MT route.
Personally, I'm hoping it means a bit less money spent on online games, as I have a habit of keeping several subs up at the same time, sometimes just to hop in and check on pals... but who knows, in the age of MTs a completist and his money are swiftly parted.
Sorry, but I doubt F2P of the old models would've survived. Noticed that the trend isn't the old model, that is to mean that everything is nickel-dimed to death? Whether it's DDO or LOTRO, Turbine recognized that some players want the all you can play option, so they provide it. So to those kiddies that think they can buy there way to max level in LOTRO, tough luck this isn't some fly by night operation, it's a real business with a real goal of sustained growth. So I doubt the days of buying XP potions or raid gear will be here much longer. If anything, it's the West that's proving the old cash shop F2P is dead as the Dodo.
SOE should really consider switching Vanguard over to F2P as a latch-ditch attempt at reviving it. It'd attract more people to the game, they'd probably start making some more money, which means they could hire more devs to get the ball rolling faster, and they may just save it.
If Vanguard went F2P I'd jump on it in a heartbeat!
Same with AoC and WAR ...
People need to keep in mind as more triple A's head in this direction F2P is going to come to mean something other than a spam filled, low quality, grindfest.
Baloney. I'm not saying P2P will not have a future, but F2P seems to be a valid business model as well.
Turbine says they've seen an increase of 500% on their cash revenue for DDO since going F2P, someone mentioned that the subscriber numbers for DD (that's people still paying rather than only playing F2P) have doubled since as well.
ArenaNet will release their hugely anticipated GW2 the same as GW as well, F2P: only buying the game, then being able to play it sub-free. With the enormous interest in GW2 and the good reputation of ANet they didn't have to do it, they could easily make it a P2P game. Still, apparently after having experience with this model with GW they're convinced they can make a non-P2P model work for them.
Good move for the polished industry, more diversity in payment models catered to your taste.
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Success and profit is success and profit..no matter what the reasons are. Now..DDO never had too many people when I subbed a few months. I checked it recently for free and it was packed. LOTRO, however...I play maybe a month and a half at a time ..about every 6 months...and I've never had any problem seeing other players. It always had enough players to group with and after work hours and weekends (eastern time on Brandywine)...it can be very very busy. No fanboy here..but I'm pretty sure it was doing fine.If there is opportunity for Turbine to expose LOTRO to 5x the players...all without really affecting the current loyal customers , still make a shitload more cash , and ensure the games future even more..I just don't see the problem .
First off, there is nothing wrong with my first statement. If the game was worth $15, they'd have still been charging $15 and threw the item shop on top of it, like SOE. Second, I'm willing to bet that 500% increase ( which, by the way, is the devs claim and in no way verifiable ) comes from a SMALL portion of the players buying the MOST stuff. Players who otherwise wouldn't be there because they wouldn't pay $15 a month for the little DDO had to offer.
Are you blind to the blatant irony in your above post?
You question the validity of the 500% increase in revenue, which is a figure that has come from the developers themselves, but then proceed to harp on about what you're "willing to bet" in the same sentence? Classic. You're unable to back up any of your claims with fact, so I'm going to go ahead and ignore that as I'm not one for entertaining silly conspiracy theories.
Is it really so hard to comprehend that a free-to-play game is naturally going to attract and retain more players than a pay-to-play game? It's quite similar to the whole impulsive shopper concept. If a product is attractive, available, and reasonably priced (in this case it has no price at all), many a shopper is going to feel some sort of impulsive attraction towards purchasing it - in this case simply downloading it and giving it a go. It's simple marketing practice, not rocket science.
It's not a matter of whether or not the game was worth the $15 monthly fee, but rather a matter of the monthly fee acting as a hurdle preventing potential players from ever reaching the point of being able to make an informed decision as to whether the monthly fee is worth it or not. I can think of a good number of MMO's I thoroughly enjoy playing but would never have tried had they had a monthly fee. And I spend money on most of them. In fact, I'd gladly pay a subscription fee for them too, now that I have tried them.
Baloney. I'm not saying P2P will not have a future, but F2P seems to be a valid business model as well.
Turbine says they've seen an increase of 500% on their cash revenue for DDO since going F2P, someone mentioned that the subscriber numbers for DD (that's people still paying rather than only playing F2P) have doubled since as well.
ArenaNet will release their hugely anticipated GW2 the same as GW as well, F2P: only buying the game, then being able to play it sub-free. With the enormous interest in GW2 and the good reputation of ANet they didn't have to do it, they could easily make it a P2P game. Still, apparently after having experience with this model with GW they're convinced they can make a non-P2P model work for them.
Good move for the polished industry, more diversity in payment models catered to your taste.
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
Success and profit is success and profit..no matter what the reasons are. Now..DDO never had too many people when I subbed a few months. I checked it recently for free and it was packed. LOTRO, however...I play maybe a month and a half at a time ..about every 6 months...and I've never had any problem seeing other players. It always had enough players to group with and after work hours and weekends (eastern time on Brandywine)...it can be very very busy. No fanboy here..but I'm pretty sure it was doing fine.If there is opportunity for Turbine to expose LOTRO to 5x the players...all without really affecting the current loyal customers , still make a shitload more cash , and ensure the games future even more..I just don't see the problem .
Plus, DDO jumped to the THIRD most popular spot by a NPD study after going F2P. If that *and* 500% increase in revenue is not success, nothing is.
Sorry, but I doubt F2P of the old models would've survived. Noticed that the trend isn't the old model, that is to mean that everything is nickel-dimed to death? Whether it's DDO or LOTRO, Turbine recognized that some players want the all you can play option, so they provide it. So to those kiddies that think they can buy there way to max level in LOTRO, tough luck this isn't some fly by night operation, it's a real business with a real goal of sustained growth. So I doubt the days of buying XP potions or raid gear will be here much longer. If anything, it's the West that's proving the old cash shop F2P is dead as the Dodo.
Exactly. There are so many misconceptions about these up and coming models that its kind of heartbreaking. These models are showing us that there are alternatives to $15 a month (even if it means just adding another option to that) that can be used with great success. I really am looking forward to LotRO changing because it could create a huge shockwave through the MMO community.
Got no problem with F2P, but I think its far more likely that the devs are going to move towards a Subs Plus model. (Even LotRo is going Subs Plus with a limited F2P option.)
Any way you cut it this is a move to get people to pay for Subs and then extra on top.
It seems that the days of P2P subscription based MMOs is comming to its end.
On horison looms a MMO giant Guild Wars 2 , easily the most anticipated MMO ( yes even more than SWTOR according to mmorpg.com) - a mmo with no subscription costs whatsoever.
DDO allready showed everyone older and less sucesfull P2P MMO can be reborn to sucess as F2P.
And now News that LOTRO is switching from P2P to F2P model is probably the last nail in the P2P buisness model coffin.
LOTRO is one of 5 most played western MMOs. Its certanly profitable. But based on its experience Turbine knows it can be even more profitable as F2P. Its clear evidence.
Sony with DC Heroes is following, APB, Black Prophecy...
We all know WAR, POTBS, Vanguard ... would surely benefit. And are probably first ones to follow.
And there are rumors brewing WOW is planning the switch too.
Will SWTOR be the last P2P MMO ? And how will that reflect on its popularity, and retention ?
I guess time will tell.
Alarmist much? :P
Sure, let's just conveniently ignore all of the MMOs in development which have made crystal clear statements about their intention to use a straight subscription model.
While I think there's more room in the market for free-to-play MMOs and "alternative" payment models, SOE hasn't done very well with their dalliances and the big AAA MMOs are still subscription based, even though WOW is pushing the envelope on that score.
But there are so many players who prefer the straight subscription model that it's just not going to disappear. The subscription MMO market shows continued and very health growth.
I'll say this again, the payment model doesn't matter. It's the game mechanics that are the most important thing that may break immersion and creates an unfair playing field.
Um, no. F2P is a game mechanic. The cash shop is in the game.
P2P your character earns his gear and money inside the game. The real life cash you pay for the sub is not part of the game mechanics.
So the payment model matters if it's INSIDE the game.
My character doesn't pay 15 dollars a month inside WoW.
In a F2P game, my character pays 75 cents or whatever it is of real life cash, for an xp potion. That's a game mechanic.
Comments
You are really going to have to learn to stop seeing labels on everything. This goes for EVERYONE. "F2P" will now mean something completely different. It can't be used the way it has been. Especially with triple AAA games that still offer a subscription model just now with this new hybrid of ftp/subscriber model that Turbine is instituting.
Don't forget the likes of The Chronicles of Spellborn!
SOE should really consider switching Vanguard over to F2P as a latch-ditch attempt at reviving it. It'd attract more people to the game, they'd probably start making some more money, which means they could hire more devs to get the ball rolling faster, and they may just save it.
I would absolutely love it if Tabula Rasa resurfaced as a F2P game too, might I add.
I will agree with this P2P is going anywhere,People will always want to make the ungodly amount money of that WoW made.I will say the future is mixture of P2P and F2P.Hybrid models give the best of both worlds.
My personally i have always said that buy to play(guild wars model) is format.The game has a box and primarly make it money from box sales( like every other video game) and if they need or chose to open a cash shop it does not need to be like the ones we see now those cash shops are primary and only source of income for the game.They have no choice but to maximize what they get in the cash shop.
Drama Queen post. Seriously. Just cause LOTRO went F2P does not mean P2P are anywhere near being "over".
Yeah, people should chill-out everywone panic now about LOTRO going F2P.
How can you not have a 500% increase in cash and a doubled population when your game was BARREN before it went free-to-play? It didn't succeed because it went free-to-play, it succeeded because they realized noone thought their game was worth $15 a month. And despite the rosy glass pictures from total fanbois, most players of LotRO will tell you the same thing, it's damn near dead.
And as far as the GW thing, hey, if everyone prefers that every mmo from now on be an extremely linear game with more in common with a singleplayer game than an mmo, they can be my guest. They'll feel right at home in SW:ToR. Oh, wait, no they won't. SW:ToR will have a sub.
-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.-
Your first paragraph makes absolutely NO sense. If the D&D population doubled, but their revenue increased by 500%, that means the average player is now spending MORE than the previous $15/month subscription fee. So much for "no one thought their game was worth $15 a month..."
And furthermore, I suggest you go inform yourself heavily as to the workings of Guild Wars 2, as if you'd even have read an ounce of information about the game you'd know that it is going to have a fully persistent world unlike its predecessor. And its quest system is anything but linear.
Seriously, if you're going to rant at least do it from an informed perspective otherwise you just end up embarrassing yourself.
First off, there is nothing wrong with my first statement. If the game was worth $15, they'd have still been charging $15 and threw the item shop on top of it, like SOE. Second, I'm willing to bet that 500% increase ( which, by the way, is the devs claim and in no way verifiable ) comes from a SMALL portion of the players buying the MOST stuff. Players who otherwise wouldn't be there because they wouldn't pay $15 a month for the little DDO had to offer.
And I was speaking in terms of an already released game (GW).I misread the quote I responded to.
-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.-
Yes, Guild Wars 2 doesn't have a subscription and that makes the game free to play.
However.
There are no item shops like you see in DDO or Lotor. If I'm not mistaken, people seem to categorize item shop games as F2P.
But since GW2 doesn't have one I think the game should fall under B2P (buy to play.)
That right there is the way for future MMOs to go.
Imagine it...WoW without a monthly sub AND no item shop. You just buy the game, install and play all you want! How awesome is that?
I can say though, that I will never ever play an MMO with item shop. If Guild Wars ever adobted an item shop, then it's buy buy from me. I hate F2P/Item shop.
B2P for the win.
Hey, wake up and smell the future: the hugely hyped (overhyped? Depends on who you ask) GW2 will be a non-P2P MMO too. And yes, it won't be linear.
God, you gotta love ANet, they're trying to prove so many beliefs and iron rules in the MMO market to be ridiculous or just excuses.
No, I'm not saying P2P has become obsolete, only that F2P doesn't mean a MMO is low quality or walking on its last legs.
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
I don't think Guild Wars should be classified as F2P. As most all F2P games out there have item shops, and guild wars does not.
Buy To Play (B2P) is more fitting I think.
Yes, it would be awesome. But WoW has a sub AND a service/itemshop (well, at least the start of something like that), that's the reality.
I guess it's up to ANet and other companies like it to prove that other payment models can be financially healthy and profitable without resorting to company greed.
... and B2P is still non-P2P ;-)
The ACTUAL size of MMORPG worlds: a comparison list between MMO's
The ease with which predictions are made on these forums:
Fratman: "I'm saying Spring 2012 at the earliest [for TOR release]. Anyone still clinging to 2011 is deluding themself at this point."
Yep.
Anet is proof that MMOs are still in their infancy and that the genre has a loooong way to go. (unlike console fighter games
)
" ... and B2P is still non-P2P ;-) "
Yep.
We may not like it, but the OP is right on the money, and I think anyone who's been keeping up with the news knows the change is unavoidable. Most of the big names in the industry have been either hinting or outright saying online gaming is going the MT route.
Personally, I'm hoping it means a bit less money spent on online games, as I have a habit of keeping several subs up at the same time, sometimes just to hop in and check on pals... but who knows, in the age of MTs a completist and his money are swiftly parted.
Sorry, but I doubt F2P of the old models would've survived. Noticed that the trend isn't the old model, that is to mean that everything is nickel-dimed to death? Whether it's DDO or LOTRO, Turbine recognized that some players want the all you can play option, so they provide it. So to those kiddies that think they can buy there way to max level in LOTRO, tough luck this isn't some fly by night operation, it's a real business with a real goal of sustained growth. So I doubt the days of buying XP potions or raid gear will be here much longer. If anything, it's the West that's proving the old cash shop F2P is dead as the Dodo.
If Vanguard went F2P I'd jump on it in a heartbeat!
Same with AoC and WAR ...
People need to keep in mind as more triple A's head in this direction F2P is going to come to mean something other than a spam filled, low quality, grindfest.
Success and profit is success and profit..no matter what the reasons are. Now..DDO never had too many people when I subbed a few months. I checked it recently for free and it was packed. LOTRO, however...I play maybe a month and a half at a time ..about every 6 months...and I've never had any problem seeing other players. It always had enough players to group with and after work hours and weekends (eastern time on Brandywine)...it can be very very busy. No fanboy here..but I'm pretty sure it was doing fine.If there is opportunity for Turbine to expose LOTRO to 5x the players...all without really affecting the current loyal customers , still make a shitload more cash , and ensure the games future even more..I just don't see the problem .
Are you blind to the blatant irony in your above post?
You question the validity of the 500% increase in revenue, which is a figure that has come from the developers themselves, but then proceed to harp on about what you're "willing to bet" in the same sentence? Classic. You're unable to back up any of your claims with fact, so I'm going to go ahead and ignore that as I'm not one for entertaining silly conspiracy theories.
Is it really so hard to comprehend that a free-to-play game is naturally going to attract and retain more players than a pay-to-play game? It's quite similar to the whole impulsive shopper concept. If a product is attractive, available, and reasonably priced (in this case it has no price at all), many a shopper is going to feel some sort of impulsive attraction towards purchasing it - in this case simply downloading it and giving it a go. It's simple marketing practice, not rocket science.
It's not a matter of whether or not the game was worth the $15 monthly fee, but rather a matter of the monthly fee acting as a hurdle preventing potential players from ever reaching the point of being able to make an informed decision as to whether the monthly fee is worth it or not. I can think of a good number of MMO's I thoroughly enjoy playing but would never have tried had they had a monthly fee. And I spend money on most of them. In fact, I'd gladly pay a subscription fee for them too, now that I have tried them.
Plus, DDO jumped to the THIRD most popular spot by a NPD study after going F2P. If that *and* 500% increase in revenue is not success, nothing is.
http://www.massively.com/2010/05/13/ddo-jumps-to-third-most-popular-spot-in-mmo-survey
DDO doubles its number and overtakes GW. In fact, it is hard to imagine NOT to turn LOTRO into F2P after the success of DDO.
Exactly. There are so many misconceptions about these up and coming models that its kind of heartbreaking. These models are showing us that there are alternatives to $15 a month (even if it means just adding another option to that) that can be used with great success. I really am looking forward to LotRO changing because it could create a huge shockwave through the MMO community.
Got no problem with F2P, but I think its far more likely that the devs are going to move towards a Subs Plus model. (Even LotRo is going Subs Plus with a limited F2P option.)
Any way you cut it this is a move to get people to pay for Subs and then extra on top.
????
Are you reading the same forums as the rest of us?
That is the number one complaint against F2P mmo's - the grind.
I think this is going to happen. It is possible even Blizzard's next game will have a micro transaction option.
Alarmist much? :P
Sure, let's just conveniently ignore all of the MMOs in development which have made crystal clear statements about their intention to use a straight subscription model.
While I think there's more room in the market for free-to-play MMOs and "alternative" payment models, SOE hasn't done very well with their dalliances and the big AAA MMOs are still subscription based, even though WOW is pushing the envelope on that score.
But there are so many players who prefer the straight subscription model that it's just not going to disappear. The subscription MMO market shows continued and very health growth.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=23003
So please, take your finger off the panic button
Um, no. F2P is a game mechanic. The cash shop is in the game.
P2P your character earns his gear and money inside the game. The real life cash you pay for the sub is not part of the game mechanics.
So the payment model matters if it's INSIDE the game.
My character doesn't pay 15 dollars a month inside WoW.
In a F2P game, my character pays 75 cents or whatever it is of real life cash, for an xp potion. That's a game mechanic.