Is it coincedence that all the columnist here like the F2P model?
Or is there some kind of secret marketing agenda going on in the background here at MMORPG?
I dont think there any coincednece. Tthere seams to be a lot of folks jumping on the lets defend turbine for going f2p. There seams to be a real push here and there to go that route.
Actually I like that LotRO is going free to play. Several others need to as well. CO, STO, Alganon, etc. just to name a few.
There are way to many Free to play quality games that publishers and devs try to pass off as pay to play worthy. Look at Aion, Age of Conan, GW2, Blade and Soul, ST:ToR, etc. the bar has been risen on quality for MMO's and it continues to rise. Gamers know what could be now so a lot of this rehashed crud simply won't cut it anymore. So if you want to develop and market a sub par game then it needs to be f2p. Atari and Cryptic are the biggest example of this.
Champions Online and Star Trek Online were both slapped together and filled with Micro Transactions and they had the nerve to declare them pay to play worthy when neither has reached a point where they are. Free to play is the realm they need to sit.
Other Devs and Publishers know where their game should be. Look at Allods, it's on par with most pay to play MMO's. Is this because it's just one of the most well done free to plays or is it because any MMO regardless of quality is deemed pay to play worthy now days? I personally believe it's a combination of both though I don't play allods anymore it was neat for about a week but in the end it boils down to being the same in essence as any of the other MMO's we have currently with a few exceptions. It's nice for what it is and it's definitely on par with most pay to plays and it certainly is one of the better free to plays, just not my thing as I'm not looking for more of what we already have.
Game Mechanics and systems are evolving, and with this new batch of MMO's on the horizon lets hope quality is as well. 2009 and 2010 seemed to be the years of pump and dump MMO's. 2010 seemed to be the year of Micro Transaction overkill in pay to play MMO's. I'm hoping 2011 will be about quality and innovation and mostly about fun finally. So many MMO's now days just feel like a 9-5.
As I said I am happy that the time for free to plays is now, less people will have to buy a game to find out it's crud. Certainly will be less QQ threads saying " I got suckered into pre-ordering or a life time subscription". So many current titles deserve to be free to play because they simply lack the quality, mechanics, or content to be worth the monthly fee.
Leave the monthly fee business model to the games with the content, quality and mechanics to warrant it.
Edited to Add: One thing I do know this Hybrid lets milk everyone for all they're worth business model needs to end. Micro Transactions have no place in pay to play games. If GW2 does as well or better than GW1 then we will hopefully see a decline of all this nonsense anyways. Might even be good for the industry as it would allow more MMO's to flourish.
Is it coincedence that all the columnist here like the F2P model?
Or is there some kind of secret marketing agenda going on in the background here at MMORPG?
I dont think there any coincednece. Tthere seams to be a lot of folks jumping on the lets defend turbine for going f2p. There seams to be a real push here and there to go that route.
I just wonder why.
Depends on the situation and the people. The success of DDO demonstrated that its possible. Lets face it, this was a act of desperation on Turbines part. In the absence of this move to a hybrid system and its success, they would have ended up pulling the plug on DDO. Having done that with Asherons Call 2(right after having sold us an expansion pack) they know the negative PR that such generates.
As for the rest, sites like MMORPG tend to follow trends. Given Jamies column, I'd not think that she is really thrilled about F2P's ^^ So one can't really say that everyone here is a fan.
I always thought LOTR was better than WoW. Just wasn't enough people playing to keep me in. Now that it's gonna be F2P, I may give it another go. Thanks for this article!
"What's concerning about Turbine's precedent is it forces players to accept the product they've invested a significant amount of money and time into is changing its business model without consultation or consent,"
They need your consent? Who owns the company? Who made the product? Not you. The producers and creators of a game can sell it on any business model they want; It's far more concerning that you would see this as a problem.
'I typically end my thoughts for the week on a call to action for the MMO community, but such action is already alive and well in the community. We've been telling the media and the industry we don't want a fully free-to-play or micro-transaction supported market for a while now. We've been pretty loud, even obnoxious at times, about making our point clear. However, this time I appeal for the industry and the gaming media to listen up, re-evaluate, and think about what this shifting model means for the industry as a whole. This includes the impact on the consumer. It's time to stop patronizing the gaming community and listen."
What the shifting model means for the industry is that: A) the model is more profitable and it brings in more players.
The model is more profitable BECAUSE it has a larger pool of players to draw money from, and micro-transactions are far easier to make, implement, and sell as opposed to writing a ton of new content for a small fee of $15 dollars a month.
The model brings more players because the core of the game is free.
What the growing popularity of F2P means to the market is simple: companies are just going to have to find more innovative ways to do business and compete.
If the growing trend is in F2P (which I don't even know if that's true or not. WoW still seems to be toppling opposition as a P2P); then its obvious that not that many people want P2P as a main option.
If you look at market trends (not some random community forum [the majority of gamers don't comment on them]) then you will see what people want.
I think this article is poorly written; as the author displays poor understanding of economics and makes wild claims about the gaming industry in which she clearly doesn't understand.
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
Calling it "free" is like saying it is "Free to eat" at a diner but you need to pay for the food, o yea and you pay for sitting at the table, o yea you pay for real silverware to use, o yea you pay for a napkin, and a drink, we also forgot to mention you pay for the conditioned air, and waitress service, and...exc...exc....
It is a scam and I will NEVER play a "pay to win" MMO. Not only is it a scam, but it destroys the community, and fair play.
If this "trend" sticks, I will be done with MMO's.
So call "free" to "play" MMOs are SCAMS to lure cash out of players pockets after getting their foot in the door. It is sneaky, shadey, and overly greedy.
NO THANKS! Stop trying to push this scam! I don't give a s*** if they do it in Korea!
Nice article! I too think that gamers should be at least a little wary of the F2P market.
I"m not against the F2P model. However, I don't think it's just a payment method and nothing more. I think it changes the focus of the game. I think that for any MMO company development resources (i.e. staff) is limited. Any game that is F2P is going to have allot of those resources devoted to producing cash shop items and incorporating additional grinds to incentivize the players to fork over cash as opposed to purchasing an store cash item.
My main concern with a F2P game is that the focus will be on the revolving door short term player and not on long term development of an interesting game. To be sure there is a market for short term players who like to hop around different games and such. But as gamers we better be wary about endorsing a type of game which may lead to shallow experience. In the case of Lotro there hasn't been an expansion since MoM (Mirkwood was more of a map in my opinion). The next "expansion" will be a cash shop and free to play with another map (maybe an additional PVP map also). For Lotro it seems like game development is definitely slowing down. I don't think that the existing Lotro playerbase (I"m a member of it) have caught on that they may not get any substantial game development other then cosmetic items and little mini maps in the near future.
Great article Jaime. I appreciate at least one journalist asking the hard questions instead of trying to promote their own agendas (that really did bother me).
I've mostly played P2P games, but their are some F2S I've played and other payment models like Guild Wars. Personally I like the subscription model with a cash shop on the side. I like the P2P model because the cash shop isn't in my face all the time like DDO and I can immerse myself in game play. I like having a cash shop because it lets me support my favorite developers and buy stuff that adds fun to my game play.
I'm currently playing EQ2 and really like their Marketplace. Station Cash works in multiple SoE titles and lets me buy fun stuff. I consider that an extra, but very optional, donation to a game I highly value.
It will be interesting to see how Turbine's model works out with LotRO which is a very different game from DDO. Will they gut a little bit of the core game (limited trait slots and gold cap) and make you buy it back? Or will they put stuff in their shop that makes the game more fun? If it's the former then I really think they're milking the customer. If it's the latter then maybe it will add value to the game. One content much at all since Moria (Loth was supposed to be part of Moria but was "delayed" and released a book update) and Mirkwood was very light. In a sense, for longer term players, what does it matter if they let you still play for free if they haven't progressed their game for a whole year.
The most important thing to me about P2P, F2S, and cash shops is that they are tailored to the game to make the game fun, not as some cobbled on milking machine. I hope that the industry doesn't get the cash cow stars in their eyes and remembers what made them successful in the first place: gaming enthusiasts making good games for people to play.
Well one instance of gutting has already been confirmed. They are limiting the char slots to 4 and if you already have 9 you will have to buy the other 5 back. At least thats what I remember reading.
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
I don't know that I would agree with that type of generalization about how business's (MMO's in specific) function. I know that in Lotro they specifically responded no to the F2P issue to the community players and then decided to go that route. Using Lotro as an example, as a long term forum reader and minor contributor most of the game suggestions and concerns are not implemented or even discussed by the game developer. I think that in part it's the opposite. I think developers map out changes to the game and only a few get more then a sampling of output from the player base.
I agree that the consumer doesn't have any say legal say with what the developer decides to do with that game. Howoever, that doesn't mean that player should passively accept any and all changes a game developer decides to implement. That is, in part, what in game forums end up being for.
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
I don't know that I would agree with that type of generalization about how business's (MMO's in specific) function. I know that in Lotro they specifically responded no to the F2P issue to the community players and then decided to go that route. Using Lotro as an example, as a long term forum reader and minor contributor most of the game suggestions and concerns are not implemented or even discussed by the game developer. I think that in part it's the opposite. I think developers map out changes to the game and only a few get more then a sampling of output from the player base.
I agree that the consumer doesn't have any say legal say with what the developer decides to do with that game. Howoever, that doesn't mean that player should passively accept any and all changes a game developer decides to implement. That is, in part, what in game forums end up being for.
I wanted to add this bit, one of the reasons UO is still going and still has such a loyal fan base is partly because the devs actually discuss changes with it's community on stratics. They talk about what they are thinking, discuss it with the community answer and ask questions from start to finish. Stygian abyss was discussed at length with the community and each of it's systems and mechanics.
I'm not clinging to anything. I played plenty and I did so with an open mind and a proper evaluation and there's no need to be confused: F2P is MMORPG's for mindless consumers, not gamers.
Alas, like with any superficial product, the consuming dummies may very well be where the biggest buck is, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative from an artistic point of view.
There is no nice/unobtrusive F2P model, if you think there is, wake up and smell the cowdung. ANY revenue model that interferes with gamemechanics will be governed by necessity first and greed after that. It's not "just an alternative revenue model", it's a completely different product.
The next thing they'll have us believe is that MMORPG design isn't an artform. You can call me a snob, like Aioshi, and make your slot machine MMO's. I don't care cuz here's what I'll do: I won't play and I won't pay. I'll save my precious attention for something that functions with a minimum of artistic integrity and leave the "becoming a moron" processes to those that deserve them.
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
I don't know that I would agree with that type of generalization about how business's (MMO's in specific) function. I know that in Lotro they specifically responded no to the F2P issue to the community players and then decided to go that route. Using Lotro as an example, as a long term forum reader and minor contributor most of the game suggestions and concerns are not implemented or even discussed by the game developer. I think that in part it's the opposite. I think developers map out changes to the game and only a few get more then a sampling of output from the player base.
I agree that the consumer doesn't have any say legal say with what the developer decides to do with that game. Howoever, that doesn't mean that player should passively accept any and all changes a game developer decides to implement. That is, in part, what in game forums end up being for.
I apologize I should have been specific: Good businesses function like that.
Secondly, I said audience; I meant: The people who they are going to make money off of. Not necessarily the people they are currently making money off of.
And you are absolutely right; a player shouldn't passively accept changes. They should argue (intelligently) and boycott the game and do whatever is necessary to let their voice be heard.
My main problem with this whole issue is everyone seems to be blaming the companies, when it's not their fault. They are doing what market trends tell them to do. It's how you survive; it's how you make better products. It's a good thing.
If you really think you know how to make them more money (or enough money to stay alive in many, if not most cases), show them the way. Flood their message boards and email boxes telling them your business strategy. If it's good, they'll listen, they may even hire you.
All of the arguments I have seen about F2P are simply ridiculous. Most of them claiming it’s a scam, or the content is terrible, the community is bad, it's pay to win. Where, yes there are instances where those arguments are supported; however, it is not true as a whole; on top of that the sheer popularity of the F2P model should also be taken into consideration. Why is it that so many people play F2P?
If you do have to spend money on gear at some point, and if you are someone like me with little time to play, it's much more logical to play the game for free up until end game PvP or whatever, and then spend like 50 $ on gear, etc .
Let's say, take Allods for instance since I am playing it currently, that it takes me half a year to get to max level and am ready for some end game action (I only play like 30min - an hour aday with some RARE exceptions and other times not at all); so if I were playing WoW, or EQ2 at 15$ a month, that's $90 over the course of 6 months.
I could instead use that 90 dollars to spend in a cash shop, supporting a game I like while getting my character geared for PvP (though most games don't require that you spend money in order to compete fairly in PvP, but I have heard things about allods) and it probably won't cost me the whole $90; I'll probably save money (However, from a hard-core gamer's perspective, this kind of thing would seem ridiculous since they might be able to get to end game in a month; therefore spending 90$ in a month on a game would seem insane. And it is. For those kinds of people P2P is a much better option).
Then there are other people who have plenty of time on their hands and can do all of the grinding necessary to get uber gear for free.
Then there are others who will spend around 3-10$ a month on their character, which is still cheaper than the regular $15 a month.
The primary theme is: game for cheap.
Which again, from a certain perspective, many people associate cheap with bad quality. But, this isn't always the case. I mean, computers now-a-days are pretty cheap. Considering how amazing some top-of the line computers are, I would say that they are dirt cheap (but not everyone shares my sentiments). The same goes for MMO's (games in general).
To be honest, I really don't see the P2P option going anywhere. It seems much more intelligent just to implement a system that has both; pay to unlock content (F2P) and P2P that offers the same (paid for) content at a monthly fee. And looking at games like DDO that's probably where it will go.
Honestly these days marketers do not care about how we feel. They think we are stupid and all they have to do is push an idea hard enough and we will just cave in and buy it or believe it to be true.
Why do some people keep posting crap about how F2P are a scam and really cost more than P2P? I've played dozens of F2P games for years and for most of them haven't spend a penny on them. I've spent a grand total of about $10. On the other hand, over the last 10 years I've spent over $2000 of P2P games.
I love the trend to F2P and think Turbine has the ideal model where you can continue with the P2P model or go F2P and add in optional features where you feel they are worthwhile. They nice part is giving players a choice instead of forcing them into a single payment model.
F2P users can spend as little (0) or as much as they want to tailor the game to their play style.
Honestly these days marketers do not care about how we feel. They think we are stupid and all they have to do is push an idea hard enough and we will just cave in and buy it or believe it to be true.
I will never comit to a F2P game model.
Marketers have to care about how you feel. If they didn't they wouldn't be able to sell you a product. Take for instance HD-DvD's... Did they not push the idead hard enough?
You have to spend money in order to advertise; the product needs to be appealing (and good) for consumers to buy it. There are plenty of products that go on market only to get canned within weeks. There are consumer reports that people read and subscribe to in order to make well informed choices. So it's clear that not all consumers are dumb, and that a company can't just crap out a product and expect it to be purchased (which of course sometimes happens if the IP is strong enough).
And if your reasoning for not playing a F2P game is because the marketers don't care about how you and your possy feels, then esentially you are making a generalization about all industries, anyone selling a product, therefore you should commit yourself to not buying anything that is being sold.
Nice to have someone out there recognise that F2P is not the saviour it is made out to be. Thanks for that Jamie.
“something most gaming journalists and writers seem to happy to accept.” – I know that was amazing wasn’t it, what with the history they have of never agreeing with a major studios decisions?
DDO and Lotro have sidestepped the big problem with F2P gaming which is PvP. That’s where the unfair game play is shown in stark contrast.
People have no real connect of what a F2P game means unless they have played one. No triple AAA game started as F2P and it never will, because F2P does not get the investment a AAA needs.
MMO's are part of my life, but not such a big part that I can't walk away, nothing is forever, life is a big apple and if F2P takes over MMO's there are other things to sink your teeth into.
I'm greatly concerned with the growing movement towards "F2P" style, particularly through forced RMT into games that already have a solid revenue stream -- subscriptions. In a F2P game RMT makes sense, because the developer needs to make money soemhow. For subscriptions on the other hand, I'm already paying them, so why should I have to pay them again for extra bits? If I'm going to pay a subscription I want access to the whole game, not bits of it.
I agree. People are worrying about F2P where true F2P isn't even the case, while RMT on top of a sub is far more worrying, even more ironic is that some who are so much against the so called F2P itemshop excesses have no qualms at all to pay for additional things on top of their sub, whether it be mounts or a remote AH or other items and services.
I think the whole F2P thing is a lot less of a problem in MMO's where PvE is the predominant factor, not PvP. I wouldn't care if I don't have the top gear or skills of the best 20 players on a server, I play to enjoy the game and hang with friends. So any need to buy an edge doesn't bother me.
Besides that, there is a difference how F2P features are integrated, F2P as it is in some F2P Asian games is very different from what you can see in a DDO.
I'm gonna rename the 'hybrid F2P' to C2P, because that's what it looks like, the emerging payment model as we slowly start to see with MMO's like DDO and LotrO soon: not the pure F2P where itemshop is dominant, also not the Pay-to-play where there's a monthly fee (and sometimes paid services or an itemshop on top of that), but Choose to Play or Choose to Pay, where you decide if and how you pay for your gaming experience.
Arena's B2P sounds even better as a payment model, but C2P will be a close second to me.
It's actually not so hard to understand why people are willing to pay for cash shop like stuff on top of their subscriptions in games like EQ/EQ2/WoW...
The players are happy and don't feel ripped off...
I personally HATE the F2P model... I will never ever touch any of those titels again... it's nothing but a big scam... Allods comes to mind...
But I admit that I have bought stuff from SoE's item shop in EQ2... why would I do that? well easy... I don't feel tricked or scammed by the company... I pay my 13€ a month and they deliver... there's customer support, there's very regular game updates, there's fixes and content upgrades, in short - I feel "at home" and I'm having a blast. Then I take a look at the item shop... I know full well that it's chock full of vanity items that I don't really need for anything in the game and I know full well they cost real money... And still I bought 2 appearance armor sets and a few furniture items which cost me about an extra 20€.. I know it's not a lot but I'm sure I'm not the only one buying stuff in their cash shop...
The thing that is so fundamentally different about the F2P model is that it follows a different philosophy. it's "come in everyone, see the amazing juggling monkey on fire!!! absolutely no cost to enter...... here's the monkey isn't it cute allright it's 50 bucks to leave or we'll break your legs!" whereas the SoE/Blizz model is more like "welcome to our show, it's fabulous it's full of action, cars blowing up and topless women on motorcycles... 15 bucks to get in. Enjoy the show and if you like stop by our souvenir shop! get your own Shoop-da-Whoop Shirt!"
Happy Customers buy more!
<S.T.E.A.L.T.H> An Agency that kicks so much ass it has to be written in all capital letters... divided by dots! www.stealth-industries.de
I'm not clinging to anything. I played plenty and I did so with an open mind and a proper evaluation and there's no need to be confused: F2P is MMORPG's for mindless consumers, not gamers.
Alas, like with any superficial product, the consuming dummies may very well be where the biggest buck is, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative from an artistic point of view.
There is no nice/unobtrusive F2P model, if you think there is, wake up and smell the cowdung. ANY revenue model that interferes with gamemechanics will be governed by necessity first and greed after that. It's not "just an alternative revenue model", it's a completely different product.
The next thing they'll have us believe is that MMORPG design isn't an artform. You can call me a snob, like Aioshi, and make your slot machine MMO's. I don't care cuz here's what I'll do: I won't play and I won't pay. I'll save my precious attention for something that functions with a minimum of artistic integrity and leave the "becoming a moron" processes to those that deserve them.
I really beg to differ when you claim that F2Ps are MMORPGs for mindless consumers (me being one who plays F2P games from time to time).
Why are you examining a business model from an "artistic point of view" (whatever that means)?
What do you mean by "no nice/unobtrusive F2P model". I certainly don't find f2p obtrusive. And it works quite well with my life style, therefore, I think it is nice. Via what grounds is that sentence true? What evidence do you have to support that F2P is a heinous as you say it is?
Most the games I play don't sell (via item shop) items that interfere with game mechanics; and the ones that do sell gear that changes a character's stats, etc. allow those same items to be available to everyone, just at a higher price (a higher price to me anyways, which is the consumption of one's time).
I don't really understand your claim that "revenue model(s)" that interefere with game mechanics are governed by necessity (need) and then greed (I'm assuming the people making money).
Well, for your information, all revenue models interfere with game mechanics, since if there was no revenue model there would be no game. or, for example, If I don't pay my membership fee for 1 month, I can't play that month. All the gear/money I could have made that month was taken from me because of the revenue model.
Despite your cryptic wording I will just assume you mean that the company will sell uber gear for a high price and less important stuff for a low price; meaning the importance of the item dictates the price (which is normal in any situation; important things are typically more expensive than less important things); and like I have already stated before, almost all F2P do not institute this kind of item shop, and if they do, they make the items alternatively available through free means; it just takes more time.
And yeah, I guess you could say you are buying items and not the game; however, those items pay for the content of the game, so in essence its the same product.
I've never read anywhere with anyone claiming that MMORPG design wasn't an artform. Sure, not a whole lot of people would look at a piece of code and say: "Now that's some great art!"; but I think most people would agree that the finished product is a piece of art.
Can you define to me what artistic integrity is? And how does a game achieve these standards? By having a P2P model?
No you're not a snob. You just don't know what you're talking about and it makes you sound stupid.
In the end ... people will only play the games they like.
And DDO and Lotro were not liked by too many.
The only boost DDO and Lotro will get are the temporary + 500% quotes with non existent dollar signs attached to it.
500% of little is still very much little. And like ALL F2P games every idiot who logged in once in the last 12 months will be counted as a player for the bragging stats on mmorpg.com.
-
And Why o Why I am not surprised the bloodless industry and media supporting that talentless industry are all for it, while the vast majority of players know the pitfalls.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
I'm greatly concerned with the growing movement towards "F2P" style, particularly through forced RMT into games that already have a solid revenue stream -- subscriptions. In a F2P game RMT makes sense, because the developer needs to make money soemhow. For subscriptions on the other hand, I'm already paying them, so why should I have to pay them again for extra bits? If I'm going to pay a subscription I want access to the whole game, not bits of it.
I agree. People are worrying about F2P where true F2P isn't even the case, while RMT on top of a sub is far more worrying, even more ironic is that some who are so much against the so called F2P itemshop excesses have no qualms at all to pay for additional things on top of their sub, whether it be mounts or a remote AH or other items and services.
I think the whole F2P thing is a lot less of a problem in MMO's where PvE is the predominant factor, not PvP. I wouldn't care if I don't have the top gear or skills of the best 20 players on a server, I play to enjoy the game and hang with friends. So any need to buy an edge doesn't bother me.
Besides that, there is a difference how F2P features are integrated, F2P as it is in some F2P Asian games is very different from what you can see in a DDO.
I'm gonna rename the 'hybrid F2P' to C2P, because that's what it looks like, the emerging payment model as we slowly start to see with MMO's like DDO and LotrO soon: not the pure F2P where itemshop is dominant, also not the Pay-to-play where there's a monthly fee (and sometimes paid services or an itemshop on top of that), but Choose to Play or Choose to Pay, where you decide if and how you pay for your gaming experience.
Arena's B2P sounds even better as a payment model, but C2P will be a close second to me.
It's actually not so hard to understand why people are willing to pay for cash shop like stuff on top of their subscriptions in games like EQ/EQ2/WoW...
The players are happy and don't feel ripped off...
I personally HATE the F2P model... I will never ever touch any of those titels again... it's nothing but a big scam... Allods comes to mind...
But I admit that I have bought stuff from SoE's item shop in EQ2... why would I do that? well easy... I don't feel tricked or scammed by the company... I pay my 13€ a month and they deliver... there's customer support, there's very regular game updates, there's fixes and content upgrades, in short - I feel "at home" and I'm having a blast. Then I take a look at the item shop... I know full well that it's chock full of vanity items that I don't really need for anything in the game and I know full well they cost real money... And still I bought 2 appearance armor sets and a few furniture items which cost me about an extra 20€.. I know it's not a lot but I'm sure I'm not the only one buying stuff in their cash shop...
The thing that is so fundamentally different about the F2P model is that it follows a different philosophy. it's "come in everyone, see the amazing juggling monkey on fire!!! absolutely no cost to enter...... here's the monkey isn't it cute allright it's 50 bucks to leave or we'll break your legs!" whereas the SoE/Blizz model is more like "welcome to our show, it's fabulous it's full of action, cars blowing up and topless women on motorcycles... 15 bucks to get in. Enjoy the show and if you like stop by our souvenir shop! get your own Shoop-da-Whoop Shirt!"
Happy Customers buy more!
I've quit several F2P games without paying anything. I still have my 50$ and I still have my legs. And Allods is a pretty sweet game. Also there were no topless women on motorcycles in WoW.
In the end ... people will only play the games they like.
And DDO and Lotro were not liked by too many.
The only boost DDO and Lotro will get are the temporary + 500% quotes with non existent dollar signs attached to it.
500% of little is still very much little. And like ALL F2P games every idiot who logged in once in the last 12 months will be counted as a player for the bragging stats on mmorpg.com.
-
And Why o Why I am not surprised the bloodless industry and media supporting that talentless industry are all for it, while the vast majority of players know the pitfalls.
Depends on how little you're talking about. But enough about your imaginary talk.
All subscription games do the same: Anyone who has ever had a subcription or probably even tried the game on a free trial could be counted as a "player" since the word is so loosely defined.
But none of this matters. It comes down to who makes the most money at the end of the day. It comes down to what is most profitable.
Even though you claim that the majority of players don't like F2P (where you get this data from, I don't know) the market still proves otherwise.
The reason why an industry would endorse such behavor (F2P) is because it brings home more money than they make now.
If they are wrong, then they will simply go under and another company will come and replace them. No big deal. You get to squeal with glee that you were right and a bigger, better company will emerge because of it. Win/Win
My big problem with f2p is that they just dont seem to be as good as p2p games. They seem to be quickly developed, buggy games with no depth at all other than the grind. Its kinda like the difference between a big budget hollywood blockbuster movie and a straight to dvd release. IMO I'd rather pay 8 bucks to see a good movie atthe theater then 5 bucks to buy a crappy movie off the shelf. Alot of companies are making quick money in the after market but its just not the same quality of product. I know Turbine has no problem putting out bad product, I played AC2, but to take their top teir product and treat it this way is very telling. Most of all it says they need money in the worst way and have no problem selling the loyalty off their past customers to get it.
Comments
I dont think there any coincednece. Tthere seams to be a lot of folks jumping on the lets defend turbine for going f2p. There seams to be a real push here and there to go that route.
I just wonder why.
Actually I like that LotRO is going free to play. Several others need to as well. CO, STO, Alganon, etc. just to name a few.
There are way to many Free to play quality games that publishers and devs try to pass off as pay to play worthy. Look at Aion, Age of Conan, GW2, Blade and Soul, ST:ToR, etc. the bar has been risen on quality for MMO's and it continues to rise. Gamers know what could be now so a lot of this rehashed crud simply won't cut it anymore. So if you want to develop and market a sub par game then it needs to be f2p. Atari and Cryptic are the biggest example of this.
Champions Online and Star Trek Online were both slapped together and filled with Micro Transactions and they had the nerve to declare them pay to play worthy when neither has reached a point where they are. Free to play is the realm they need to sit.
Other Devs and Publishers know where their game should be. Look at Allods, it's on par with most pay to play MMO's. Is this because it's just one of the most well done free to plays or is it because any MMO regardless of quality is deemed pay to play worthy now days? I personally believe it's a combination of both though I don't play allods anymore it was neat for about a week but in the end it boils down to being the same in essence as any of the other MMO's we have currently with a few exceptions. It's nice for what it is and it's definitely on par with most pay to plays and it certainly is one of the better free to plays, just not my thing as I'm not looking for more of what we already have.
Game Mechanics and systems are evolving, and with this new batch of MMO's on the horizon lets hope quality is as well. 2009 and 2010 seemed to be the years of pump and dump MMO's. 2010 seemed to be the year of Micro Transaction overkill in pay to play MMO's. I'm hoping 2011 will be about quality and innovation and mostly about fun finally. So many MMO's now days just feel like a 9-5.
As I said I am happy that the time for free to plays is now, less people will have to buy a game to find out it's crud. Certainly will be less QQ threads saying " I got suckered into pre-ordering or a life time subscription". So many current titles deserve to be free to play because they simply lack the quality, mechanics, or content to be worth the monthly fee.
Leave the monthly fee business model to the games with the content, quality and mechanics to warrant it.
Edited to Add: One thing I do know this Hybrid lets milk everyone for all they're worth business model needs to end. Micro Transactions have no place in pay to play games. If GW2 does as well or better than GW1 then we will hopefully see a decline of all this nonsense anyways. Might even be good for the industry as it would allow more MMO's to flourish.
Depends on the situation and the people. The success of DDO demonstrated that its possible. Lets face it, this was a act of desperation on Turbines part. In the absence of this move to a hybrid system and its success, they would have ended up pulling the plug on DDO. Having done that with Asherons Call 2(right after having sold us an expansion pack) they know the negative PR that such generates.
As for the rest, sites like MMORPG tend to follow trends. Given Jamies column, I'd not think that she is really thrilled about F2P's ^^ So one can't really say that everyone here is a fan.
I always thought LOTR was better than WoW. Just wasn't enough people playing to keep me in. Now that it's gonna be F2P, I may give it another go. Thanks for this article!
"What's concerning about Turbine's precedent is it forces players to accept the product they've invested a significant amount of money and time into is changing its business model without consultation or consent,"
They need your consent? Who owns the company? Who made the product? Not you. The producers and creators of a game can sell it on any business model they want; It's far more concerning that you would see this as a problem.
'I typically end my thoughts for the week on a call to action for the MMO community, but such action is already alive and well in the community. We've been telling the media and the industry we don't want a fully free-to-play or micro-transaction supported market for a while now. We've been pretty loud, even obnoxious at times, about making our point clear. However, this time I appeal for the industry and the gaming media to listen up, re-evaluate, and think about what this shifting model means for the industry as a whole. This includes the impact on the consumer. It's time to stop patronizing the gaming community and listen."
What the shifting model means for the industry is that: A) the model is more profitable and
it brings in more players.
The model is more profitable BECAUSE it has a larger pool of players to draw money from, and micro-transactions are far easier to make, implement, and sell as opposed to writing a ton of new content for a small fee of $15 dollars a month.
The model brings more players because the core of the game is free.
What the growing popularity of F2P means to the market is simple: companies are just going to have to find more innovative ways to do business and compete.
If the growing trend is in F2P (which I don't even know if that's true or not. WoW still seems to be toppling opposition as a P2P); then its obvious that not that many people want P2P as a main option.
If you look at market trends (not some random community forum [the majority of gamers don't comment on them]) then you will see what people want.
I think this article is poorly written; as the author displays poor understanding of economics and makes wild claims about the gaming industry in which she clearly doesn't understand.
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
DDO has a fourth model. It's subscription with microtransactions.
FTP is NOT FREE! It is MICROTRANSACTION.
Calling it "free" is like saying it is "Free to eat" at a diner but you need to pay for the food, o yea and you pay for sitting at the table, o yea you pay for real silverware to use, o yea you pay for a napkin, and a drink, we also forgot to mention you pay for the conditioned air, and waitress service, and...exc...exc....
It is a scam and I will NEVER play a "pay to win" MMO. Not only is it a scam, but it destroys the community, and fair play.
If this "trend" sticks, I will be done with MMO's.
So call "free" to "play" MMOs are SCAMS to lure cash out of players pockets after getting their foot in the door. It is sneaky, shadey, and overly greedy.
NO THANKS! Stop trying to push this scam! I don't give a s*** if they do it in Korea!
Nice article! I too think that gamers should be at least a little wary of the F2P market.
I"m not against the F2P model. However, I don't think it's just a payment method and nothing more. I think it changes the focus of the game. I think that for any MMO company development resources (i.e. staff) is limited. Any game that is F2P is going to have allot of those resources devoted to producing cash shop items and incorporating additional grinds to incentivize the players to fork over cash as opposed to purchasing an store cash item.
My main concern with a F2P game is that the focus will be on the revolving door short term player and not on long term development of an interesting game. To be sure there is a market for short term players who like to hop around different games and such. But as gamers we better be wary about endorsing a type of game which may lead to shallow experience. In the case of Lotro there hasn't been an expansion since MoM (Mirkwood was more of a map in my opinion). The next "expansion" will be a cash shop and free to play with another map (maybe an additional PVP map also). For Lotro it seems like game development is definitely slowing down. I don't think that the existing Lotro playerbase (I"m a member of it) have caught on that they may not get any substantial game development other then cosmetic items and little mini maps in the near future.
Well one instance of gutting has already been confirmed. They are limiting the char slots to 4 and if you already have 9 you will have to buy the other 5 back. At least thats what I remember reading.
Originally posted by Eloar
Just because a few people are upset that the MMO they have been playing and investing in is changing business models is not reason to write an article telling the industry to look and notice consumers. That kind of condescension is unnecessary; of course they are listening; a business must FIRST and foremost realize what their audience wants before they make any kind of decision; THEN is it possible and is it profitable.
When you agree to play an MMO you agree to the terms of the business. NOT your terms. If you don't like the idea of paying for a game that could, tomorrow, change the way it charges its customers (or better yet, not exist), then don't play MMO's. Since that is a RISK you take when investing in an MMO.
I don't know that I would agree with that type of generalization about how business's (MMO's in specific) function. I know that in Lotro they specifically responded no to the F2P issue to the community players and then decided to go that route. Using Lotro as an example, as a long term forum reader and minor contributor most of the game suggestions and concerns are not implemented or even discussed by the game developer. I think that in part it's the opposite. I think developers map out changes to the game and only a few get more then a sampling of output from the player base.
I agree that the consumer doesn't have any say legal say with what the developer decides to do with that game. Howoever, that doesn't mean that player should passively accept any and all changes a game developer decides to implement. That is, in part, what in game forums end up being for.
I wanted to add this bit, one of the reasons UO is still going and still has such a loyal fan base is partly because the devs actually discuss changes with it's community on stratics. They talk about what they are thinking, discuss it with the community answer and ask questions from start to finish. Stygian abyss was discussed at length with the community and each of it's systems and mechanics.
I'm not clinging to anything. I played plenty and I did so with an open mind and a proper evaluation and there's no need to be confused: F2P is MMORPG's for mindless consumers, not gamers.
Alas, like with any superficial product, the consuming dummies may very well be where the biggest buck is, but that doesn't make it a viable alternative from an artistic point of view.
There is no nice/unobtrusive F2P model, if you think there is, wake up and smell the cowdung. ANY revenue model that interferes with gamemechanics will be governed by necessity first and greed after that. It's not "just an alternative revenue model", it's a completely different product.
The next thing they'll have us believe is that MMORPG design isn't an artform. You can call me a snob, like Aioshi, and make your slot machine MMO's. I don't care cuz here's what I'll do: I won't play and I won't pay. I'll save my precious attention for something that functions with a minimum of artistic integrity and leave the "becoming a moron" processes to those that deserve them.
I apologize I should have been specific: Good businesses function like that.
Secondly, I said audience; I meant: The people who they are going to make money off of. Not necessarily the people they are currently making money off of.
And you are absolutely right; a player shouldn't passively accept changes. They should argue (intelligently) and boycott the game and do whatever is necessary to let their voice be heard.
My main problem with this whole issue is everyone seems to be blaming the companies, when it's not their fault. They are doing what market trends tell them to do. It's how you survive; it's how you make better products. It's a good thing.
If you really think you know how to make them more money (or enough money to stay alive in many, if not most cases), show them the way. Flood their message boards and email boxes telling them your business strategy. If it's good, they'll listen, they may even hire you.
All of the arguments I have seen about F2P are simply ridiculous. Most of them claiming it’s a scam, or the content is terrible, the community is bad, it's pay to win. Where, yes there are instances where those arguments are supported; however, it is not true as a whole; on top of that the sheer popularity of the F2P model should also be taken into consideration. Why is it that so many people play F2P?
If you do have to spend money on gear at some point, and if you are someone like me with little time to play, it's much more logical to play the game for free up until end game PvP or whatever, and then spend like 50 $ on gear, etc .
Let's say, take Allods for instance since I am playing it currently, that it takes me half a year to get to max level and am ready for some end game action (I only play like 30min - an hour aday with some RARE exceptions and other times not at all); so if I were playing WoW, or EQ2 at 15$ a month, that's $90 over the course of 6 months.
I could instead use that 90 dollars to spend in a cash shop, supporting a game I like while getting my character geared for PvP (though most games don't require that you spend money in order to compete fairly in PvP, but I have heard things about allods) and it probably won't cost me the whole $90; I'll probably save money (However, from a hard-core gamer's perspective, this kind of thing would seem ridiculous since they might be able to get to end game in a month; therefore spending 90$ in a month on a game would seem insane. And it is. For those kinds of people P2P is a much better option).
Then there are other people who have plenty of time on their hands and can do all of the grinding necessary to get uber gear for free.
Then there are others who will spend around 3-10$ a month on their character, which is still cheaper than the regular $15 a month.
The primary theme is: game for cheap.
Which again, from a certain perspective, many people associate cheap with bad quality. But, this isn't always the case. I mean, computers now-a-days are pretty cheap. Considering how amazing some top-of the line computers are, I would say that they are dirt cheap (but not everyone shares my sentiments). The same goes for MMO's (games in general).
To be honest, I really don't see the P2P option going anywhere. It seems much more intelligent just to implement a system that has both; pay to unlock content (F2P) and P2P that offers the same (paid for) content at a monthly fee. And looking at games like DDO that's probably where it will go.
Honestly these days marketers do not care about how we feel. They think we are stupid and all they have to do is push an idea hard enough and we will just cave in and buy it or believe it to be true.
I will never comit to a F2P game model.
Why do some people keep posting crap about how F2P are a scam and really cost more than P2P? I've played dozens of F2P games for years and for most of them haven't spend a penny on them. I've spent a grand total of about $10. On the other hand, over the last 10 years I've spent over $2000 of P2P games.
I love the trend to F2P and think Turbine has the ideal model where you can continue with the P2P model or go F2P and add in optional features where you feel they are worthwhile. They nice part is giving players a choice instead of forcing them into a single payment model.
F2P users can spend as little (0) or as much as they want to tailor the game to their play style.
Nice to have someone out there recognise that F2P is not the saviour it is made out to be. Thanks for that Jamie.
“something most gaming journalists and writers seem to happy to accept.” – I know that was amazing wasn’t it, what with the history they have of never agreeing with a major studios decisions?
DDO and Lotro have sidestepped the big problem with F2P gaming which is PvP. That’s where the unfair game play is shown in stark contrast.
People have no real connect of what a F2P game means unless they have played one. No triple AAA game started as F2P and it never will, because F2P does not get the investment a AAA needs.
MMO's are part of my life, but not such a big part that I can't walk away, nothing is forever, life is a big apple and if F2P takes over MMO's there are other things to sink your teeth into.
It's actually not so hard to understand why people are willing to pay for cash shop like stuff on top of their subscriptions in games like EQ/EQ2/WoW...
The players are happy and don't feel ripped off...
I personally HATE the F2P model... I will never ever touch any of those titels again... it's nothing but a big scam... Allods comes to mind...
But I admit that I have bought stuff from SoE's item shop in EQ2... why would I do that? well easy... I don't feel tricked or scammed by the company... I pay my 13€ a month and they deliver... there's customer support, there's very regular game updates, there's fixes and content upgrades, in short - I feel "at home" and I'm having a blast. Then I take a look at the item shop... I know full well that it's chock full of vanity items that I don't really need for anything in the game and I know full well they cost real money... And still I bought 2 appearance armor sets and a few furniture items which cost me about an extra 20€.. I know it's not a lot but I'm sure I'm not the only one buying stuff in their cash shop...
The thing that is so fundamentally different about the F2P model is that it follows a different philosophy. it's "come in everyone, see the amazing juggling monkey on fire!!! absolutely no cost to enter...... here's the monkey isn't it cute allright it's 50 bucks to leave or we'll break your legs!" whereas the SoE/Blizz model is more like "welcome to our show, it's fabulous it's full of action, cars blowing up and topless women on motorcycles... 15 bucks to get in. Enjoy the show and if you like stop by our souvenir shop! get your own Shoop-da-Whoop Shirt!"
Happy Customers buy more!
<S.T.E.A.L.T.H>
An Agency that kicks so much ass it has to be written in all capital letters... divided by dots!
www.stealth-industries.de
In the end ... people will only play the games they like.
And DDO and Lotro were not liked by too many.
The only boost DDO and Lotro will get are the temporary + 500% quotes with non existent dollar signs attached to it.
500% of little is still very much little. And like ALL F2P games every idiot who logged in once in the last 12 months will be counted as a player for the bragging stats on mmorpg.com.
-
And Why o Why I am not surprised the bloodless industry and media supporting that talentless industry are all for it, while the vast majority of players know the pitfalls.
Its embarrassing when an NPC compliments you in an MMo, the only relevant, cool and epic things come from players whispering you Grtz, mate, we did it. copyright Pilnkplonk
I've quit several F2P games without paying anything. I still have my 50$ and I still have my legs. And Allods is a pretty sweet game. Also there were no topless women on motorcycles in WoW.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
Depends on how little you're talking about. But enough about your imaginary talk.
All subscription games do the same: Anyone who has ever had a subcription or probably even tried the game on a free trial could be counted as a "player" since the word is so loosely defined.
But none of this matters. It comes down to who makes the most money at the end of the day. It comes down to what is most profitable.
Even though you claim that the majority of players don't like F2P (where you get this data from, I don't know) the market still proves otherwise.
The reason why an industry would endorse such behavor (F2P) is because it brings home more money than they make now.
If they are wrong, then they will simply go under and another company will come and replace them. No big deal. You get to squeal with glee that you were right and a bigger, better company will emerge because of it. Win/Win
My big problem with f2p is that they just dont seem to be as good as p2p games. They seem to be quickly developed, buggy games with no depth at all other than the grind. Its kinda like the difference between a big budget hollywood blockbuster movie and a straight to dvd release. IMO I'd rather pay 8 bucks to see a good movie atthe theater then 5 bucks to buy a crappy movie off the shelf. Alot of companies are making quick money in the after market but its just not the same quality of product. I know Turbine has no problem putting out bad product, I played AC2, but to take their top teir product and treat it this way is very telling. Most of all it says they need money in the worst way and have no problem selling the loyalty off their past customers to get it.
Excellent article! Especially about devaluing a product to create a F2P and remarket it then. Well Said!