It's natural that f2p would become popular these days because half the population is out of work and can't find work. Coffee shops and McDonalds are the new LAN lords.
F2p is just a marketing scheme and nothing more. It is a way to get people in and to get them playing.While the real truth is eventually the players will end up paying or leaving.
People should informed of this marketing ploy and tell you their friends also. This article about f2p games-http://tinyurl.com/28qxgh7 clearly explains just what happens when a f2p game becomes successful and how in the end the players end up losing their money and time. It is only through the spreading of knowledge, that we can have any hope of stopping the spread of the plague, that is the f2p game.
Free to Play means you CAN Play For Free. Obviously, they Need to make money to pay for the service. Subscription companies receive money monthly and from the purchase of the game (including expansions). You do realize, not so long ago, people were calling Subscription gaming a Scam? They said "why would you pay every month for something you do not use all the time?" or "You have to pay them or you can't play the game?" or "You have to buy the software AND continue to pay them?" - "Sounds like a scam to me". These are the things that people said when subscription gaming first came around.
F2P games give out their product for free and obviously add in things that make you want to pay to continue playing. They do not hold you at gunpoint and tell you to pay. They do not lie to you and say you never have to pay anything. Everyone enters the game knowing what to expect. There is no Scheming involved. It is the player's choice. You expect these games to exist on server racks using massive bandwidth for -free-? Please.
In regards to that article, I make it a point to not trust articles from bigoted ragers that cannot use proper grammar (In a published article of all places?). The guy says he gets banned for reporting harassment but judging from his foul wording and distaste for the company, I can assume it was much more than that.
I truly believe 90% of ragers in regards to f2p games are people with no concept of the value of money. Either children or people still mooching off their parents. The other 10% are people that are (rightfully so) not impressed with the quality of work in comparison to Pay to Play games.
I will say now though, I have played plenty of Subscription games that were not even close in quality to most of the free to play games out right now. I've also played plenty of Subscription games that are miles ahead of free-to-play games. Eventually, technology will catch up in terms of cost-effective programming and the competition will be based on quality of content not whether you pay or not. Soon after that, subscriptions and free-to-play will switch roles and subs will be trying to compete with f2p not the other way around. Life is circular.
Despite what we think or even want. The F2P Payment model is the future of online gaming. Companies have already debated it and looked at the pure FACTS and they show that the F2P Payment model has the potential to earn far more money then the money + box model.
There are already monthly subscription games that are turning to a F2P Payment model. MMO's in the future have already started to show that they are imbracing this new model for the future. You have big companies like EA, Turbine (heck even Blizzard has said the model interests them and could be the future of World of Warcraft once the population starts to die off). You have games like LOTRO and NFSW using this payment model. Dozens and Dozens of MMO's already using this model and many more on the horizon.
At the end of the day the studies, quarterly reports, ect. all show that these F2P games tend to make multiples more then there monthly subscription counterparts.
When we look at the F2P model right now we tend to see a substandard in quality and content. But thats not always the case, and the shift is already in full force to bring the F2P quality up-to the once standard of monthly subscriptions.
As customers, we should be embracing this change in the system. We always complain and cry about lack of trials for MMO's and so on at release. Yet, this change, is going / giving us exactly what we want and then some. We get to effectivly play the game without ever having to pay a single dollar unless we choose to do so. The decision is put into our hands if we want to pay anything or pay nothing. No more having to drop $50-$60 for a MMO and then turning to find out that a month later the game was trash and not worth the investment. Thats $50-$60 that could have been spent on other things or on parts of a game that we do enjoy playing.
I have yet to see / find a down side to the F2P model. Looking back at all the F2P games I have tried out over the years. I imagine I have saved upwards of $1k+ dollars in pure $50 box savings if they where to have been sold as a box + subscription setup.
I have been playing Runes of Magic over the last year fairly extensively while checking out some other offerings. But over that year of Runes of Magic I have spent a total of $14 on the game. I am part of a guild that is fairly actively instance raiding and guild sieging. While there are times I wouldn't have mind dropping down another $20 to pick somethings up. But the best part of it was that I had the choice if I wanted to or not. Thats a years worth of gameplay and fun I have had at the cost of $14. Where if you compare that to say World of Warcraft it would have been $50-60 (For the box game + expansion) and that 12 months at $14.99 ($229.88). Thats how much I would have spent for World of Warcraft + monthly subscriptions for the year. $229.88 in Runes of Magic Rubies would have set my character(s) up for life and bought anything I could have thought of in the game and then some.
But but you might be saying. Why should someone that has money have any type of advantage over someone that doesn't pay anything for the product. I have heard this argument dozens of times and the fact of it is. You have the money to start with if your paying a monthly fee for a game + the box. So in part the topic is completly a moot point. But alot of people tend to forget we pay games to have fun (well most of us). If you enjoy a game what should it matter if you support it by buying stuff or don't support it by not buying anything. It costs money (lots of money) to make, support, and keep these games running. F2P developers take a much bigger risk because they give us the option of not paying a penny for the game.
I just find the whole argument silly because we always complain about a lack of options yet when options come our way we complain about the different options that are offered. I am a firm believer that even if every MMO went free to play (had no cash shop or anything) people would still complain about everything.
F2P will never die, especially since some of the F2P games out there can compete with some P2P ... People are getting sick and tired of paying for mediocre crap that is buggy and doesnt work ; so they just go to a F2P with already knowing its going to be buggy and wont work but yet, they arent spending their money on it which gives them a small comfort knowing that.
What do you define as a AAA MMO? Last I checked NFSW is made by a AAA company and its considered a MMO Racing game is coming out in the next few months.
Again what do you define that makes a MMO a AAA title. If its purely sales / profit then I point you at RuneScape. The game makes more money on a monthly bases then World of Warcraft and has as many (if not more) accounts / players then World of Warcraft. Its also a F2P game.
I tend to find the P2P games more buggy then the F2P ones. With the exception of maybe 4-5 P2P MMO's most of the rest have shown that the P2P quality is not any better or less buggy then the F2P ones.
You have games like, Age of Conan, StarTrek Online, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Spellborn, Vanguard SOH, Champions Online, Tabula Rasa, ect. All of them launched with loads of issues, bugs, lack of content. Yet there price was the same as every other P2P MMO. If you look at pure quality then out of the P2P MMO's there really is only a handful that offer any type of quality and polish. WoW, EQ2, EQ, UO, ect. Even then each of them launched with there share of issues at the time. But yet you still had to pay the same amount.
Yet the same thing may be happening on the F2P market, You do not have to pay anything for them games. If a F2P game launchs in a rough state or lack of content its no big loss rather you play it or not. You can come and go as you choose without costing anything to you. How is that a bad thing when its no loss to you?
What do you define as a AAA MMO? Last I checked NFSW is made by a AAA company and its considered a MMO Racing game is coming out in the next few months.
Again what do you define that makes a MMO a AAA title. If its purely sales / profit then I point you at RuneScape. The game makes more money on a monthly bases then World of Warcraft and has as many (if not more) accounts / players then World of Warcraft. Its also a F2P game.
Let me show you the most hyped games in this website that will release in the future. Runescape is not the future dude and if that's the future then we're doomed.
FFXIV, Guild Wars 2, SWtor, Rift, Tera, Secret world, Earthrise. These are the most hyped games that will come in the future in this website.
Now who's f2p from this list? None. Then how can you say that f2p is the future when I can't see any hyped f2p game in this list? F2p isn't dieing but is not showing signs that will become the future either.
Of course it doesn't. Yeah, some of those games my succeed, some may fail. However there is no f2p at all in the most hyped future games list. So saying that f2p it's the future goes against the facts. I mean what f2p game should we look forward to in the near future? He mentioned NFS, driving game not really the cup of tea for the majority here.
Despite what we think or even want. The F2P Payment model is the future of online gaming.
Seems like you missed the other article. F2P is not the future of online gaming; it is just a part of it. That is one of the most general and broadest claims I've seen in a bit over here which, of course, has no support to back it whatsoever.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
What do you define as a AAA MMO? Last I checked NFSW is made by a AAA company and its considered a MMO Racing game is coming out in the next few months.
Again what do you define that makes a MMO a AAA title. If its purely sales / profit then I point you at RuneScape. The game makes more money on a monthly bases then World of Warcraft and has as many (if not more) accounts / players then World of Warcraft. Its also a F2P game.
Let me show you the most hyped games in this website that will release in the future. Runescape is not the future dude and if that's the future then we're doomed.
FFXIV, Guild Wars 2, SWtor, Rift, Tera, Secret world, Earthrise. These are the most hyped games that will come in the future in this website.
Now who's f2p from this list? None. Then how can you say that f2p is the future when I can't see any hyped f2p game in this list? F2p isn't dieing but is not showing signs that will become the future either.
It for sure shows signs that its the future when major companys are taking games that are doing amazingly well (LOTRO). when you have companys like Blizzard saying that it sure could be the future of World of Warcraft and its future games. When you have games like SWKOTOR where Bioware has stated they are very interested in not using a monthly subscription for the game (They have not stated if it will or will not have a monthly fee. But there terms of service suggest something else). Where there terms of service is worded in such a way that the game features a cash / item shop.
Oh BTW Guild Wars 2 is not considered a P2P game. If anything it would fall within the F2P catagory just like GW1 is. GW2 will not have a monthly subscription. You buy the game and thats it, so its not a P2P Monthly Subscription game.
And we wont even get into Tera since just about every knows its more then likely going to end up the route of Aion. Remember that so called WoW killer there that was P2P that all but died within the first 3 months.
Last I heard The Secret World they where heavly considering going the AO right with it that would make it fall within the F2P catagory.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
Ive been following 3 indy game recently after I left AoC and from my experience its really the best option for indy companies. No-one know you, no-one gives a shit about you, so you want to give them free taste of the game. I suppose this could work as B2P and give free trial straight away. Of course there needs to be somekind of catch to get money as nothing is free in real world.
Btw, long time veteran and true MMO hero. I really think World of Tank is going to be next big success of F2P MMOs! So much potential.
Hater of hater of World of Tank. Latest wargame from wargaming.net.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
When a game goes F2P, that is not the same as starting F2P for one thing. Another is LOTRO is starting to look and play old, and without enough fresh content, any MMO starts to strugglee. Because its F2P, the subs no longer matter. What I would like to know how many paying customers DDO has, not the number of people playing they keep spitting out. And lastly, most PC games end up in bargain prices, that doesnt' mean that we run around claiming all games are only 15-20 dollars and that there are no Triple A titles left because they all wind up on sale.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Despite what we think or even want. The F2P Payment model is the future of online gaming.
Seems like you missed the other article. F2P is not the future of online gaming; it is just a part of it. That is one of the most general and broadest claims I've seen in a bit over here which, of course, has no support to back it whatsoever.
Is there any type of support that suggests it could not be the future? I have no doubt that there will always be some form of P2P / Monthly subscription for some games. But if you purely look at the games that have been coming out and look at the profitability / where the money is. It shows that there is ALOT more money to be made off a F2P / Hybrid model then the P2P.
When you are turning developers that once claimed they would never go to a F2P / Cash shop setup.. And then the next year they are doing just that.. Well that speaks volumes on where the money is at.
Now I agree it may be much to say it is the future. I actually see the future using some sort of mix of options in the final picture. Sorta like the LOTRO model. And in all honesty there is nothing wrong with LOTRO's adaption of the model. You can go the F2P route if you like or you can go the P2P route if you like.
I am all for options that opens up the markets to more gamers.
As far as hype goes.. I await someone that names a game that had huge hype that has actually done well / very good (besides World of Warcraft). If anything Hype has shown us that them are games we should stay away from. They tend to be the biggest let downs / most bug ridden games. Vanguard had HUGE hype going for it.. Age of Conan had hype going for it.. Spellborn had hype going for it.. Aion was charged as the WoW killer by loads of people and its developers.. Should I just name every MMO out there since most of them always make it into the Top 5 within several months to a year of release.
If anything the less hyped games DDO, LOTRO, ect. are doing very well today. Some might have had a very rough start but look at them now.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
Your "facts" is a hype meter of unproven games that might fail to launch or fail in the first months. I hardly see that as conclusive facts that P2P is the distant future. It might be the near future, but if games keep coming out and fail to thrive at birth like 90% seem to do then investments in them are going to plummet. I think a balance of the two is probably the future and if investment keeps dropping then I see P2P getting the shaft on that deal. F2P makes money upfront to create more content while P2P relies on investment and paying back on the long run.
Also in a heavy market with lots of games P2P gets screwed because people will generally only have a one or a few paid accounts. In a F2P market place you can jump in and out of games with little worry. I could play every game and only pay when I want to and when I get bored jump to another. I can not play WoW, AoC, EVE, AION, etc. all in the same month unless I want to spend crap loads of cash on subs.
So the more games that release the less likely they will make money with P2P or they will have to eat each other while F2P just keeps going along like nothing happened.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
So the #2 Most Popular P2P MMO went F2P because it was getting old? I find that hard to believe as its held the #2 spot for some time as far as subscriptions went. The fact that Turbine seen DDO do a 180 and become more profitable then LOTRO says some things. The fact that Turbine has decided on a hybrid model for a VERY popular / currently CASH MAKING game also says things. LOTRO feels about as dated as World of Warcraft does with the exception that LOTRO has ALOT more in the graphics department then WoW does.
It's hard to name F2P MMO games coming out. Because for the most part you don' see them coming years in advance like you do P2P games. Because with F2P games it really doesn't matter if they start spending money on hyping there game up 1 month before release of years before release like P2P games do. It's just simple that they do not need to hype there games. You tag Free onto something and people are going to try it out at some point.
BTW last I heard The Agency was going the F2P route. That considered a AAA mmo? I am still trying to figure out what a AAA MMO really is. Even more so how you can determin a AAA game before its even released.
Last I heard from a developer AAA simply ment (and I quote) "Has sold, or is predicted/targetted to sell, over one million copies."
Well if thats the case then how can a F2P game be a AAA game under them terms. If we go by accounts then just about every F2P game has had atleast a million accounts at some point. If we go by subscriptions then well most MMO's even P2P do not fall under the AAA definition, since most MMO's do not have over a million subscriptions.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
Your "facts" is a hype meter of unproven games that might fail to launch or fail in the first months. I hardly see that as conclusive facts that P2P is the distant future. It might be the near future, but if games keep coming out and fail to thrive at birth like 90% seem to do then investments in them are going to plummet. I think a balance of the two is probably the future and if investment keeps dropping then I see P2P getting the shaft on that deal. F2P makes money upfront to create more content while P2P relies on investment and paying back on the long run.
Also in a heavy market with lots of games P2P gets screwed because people will generally only have a one or a few paid accounts. In a F2P market place you can jump in and out of games with little worry. I could play every game and only pay when I want to and when I get bored jump to another. I can not play WoW, AoC, EVE, AION, etc. all in the same month unless I want to spend crap loads of cash on subs.
So the more games that release the less likely they will make money with P2P or they will have to eat each other while F2P just keeps going along like nothing happened.
Very good points. I also agree that a Hybrid style model is actually the best choice. A mixture of F2P / Monthly subscription option would be a idea style setup.
Your "facts" is a hype meter of unproven games that might fail to launch or fail in the first months. I hardly see that as conclusive facts that P2P is the distant future. It might be the near future, but if games keep coming out and fail to thrive at birth like 90% seem to do then investments in them are going to plummet. I think a balance of the two is probably the future and if investment keeps dropping then I see P2P getting the shaft on that deal.
I didn't say that p2p is the near or far future. I replied to the "f2p is the future" comment. For me both will keep going. So neither of them is the only future. The way I see it the p2p hyped games that fail will turn f2p or shut down. Those who succeed will keep going p2p.
What do you mean a balance of the two anyway. For me it's a cash shop mmo and a non cash shop mmo. You can't have both. When I say cs I don't mean 1 shiny ponny but the typical f2p cash shops. Those on which f2p games rely to get money from the players which for me have no place in the game I want to play.
People have proven time and time again in Sub games and in single player games (dragon age) that they will pay extra for extra features. Thus the hybrid. Right or wrong has no place in the discussion because it is only a question of will people pay or not. And they will.
Soon games will hold back stuff (if not already) that is complete and ready for launch so that they can release it as a DLC.
Soon games will hold back stuff (if not already) that is complete and ready for launch so that they can release it as a DLC.
Kind of like how the SNES was already up and running long before the NES died out but, the company made a logical decision to hold off on it's release to not kill their current product.
Companies already withhold products and content to increase hype or create the illusion of demand. Like how Nintendo held back on production of the Wii to increase it's hype. The company I worked for at the time of the Wii release experienced this firsthand. They would only send 5-20 of them at a time to each company and a marketing rep from their manufacturer flat out told us this was the reason for it.
Companies will always do what is best for them and their pocket books. We should not expect more or less. If players paid more for better content, they would make better content. If players stopped paying from grinding boring games, they would stop making them. So long as people are willing to pay and are addicted to it enough to keep the company's bank account full, they will continue to do what they do. They do not care why it works (addiction or fun); they only care that it does work.
Now I agree it may be much to say it is the future.
This is the primary issue I have with your statements, this generalization of the future. Sure, I disagree with you on a number of points, which is normal of course, but this is the one I find completely unsupportable. Just think back to all the statements made about changing the game industry as we know it. The future of gaming is changed because:
... Black and White removed the need for menus and now all our commands can be done with the wave of a mouse
.... PS3 and Xbox360, PC gaming is now dead because you've got these all in one machines that are easy to use and supposedly cost less than PC gaming rigs
... Games for Windows Live
... The Sims, one of the most successful franchises ever, still not sucessfully copied or even really mimicked in other games
.... HD graphics are here, everyone roll over, no other type of games will be expected or accepted... and then the Wii becomes more wildly successful than anyone in the industry can imagine
... iPad games are the wave of the future
.... Social Games are the wave of the future
These claims are often used and never realy pan out. I think it's because our entertainment medium is so dynamic, ever changing. Just when you think the mouse has become the wave of the future, you get controllers, and then you get motion control which, by the way, was called a fad when nintendo put it out but no Sony and MS each have their own versions.
I do think F2P is going to have a bigger piece of the pie in the future. I do, but that doe snot mean the F2P "is the future". I think that is just such a broad statement that implies the death of everything else and therefore, is not supportable, in anyway. Every time we think we've "seen the future" something in this industry changes and surprises us. P2P also had a predictability a lot of people love. You set aside your 10-15 a month and its an ongoing expensive. Subscription models work for a lot of industries. They tend to have a low cost illusion in that people think just 10 dollars not 120 a year plus expansions. There is a bit of an unkonwn in the true costs of playing a F2P game as it was meant to be experienced.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Comments
This time I agree. F2P isn't dying and like a certain president said 'P2P and F2P can coexist peacefully.'
Well... not really with the president hee hee
Playing MUDs and MMOs since 1994.
It's natural that f2p would become popular these days because half the population is out of work and can't find work. Coffee shops and McDonalds are the new LAN lords.
Free to Play means you CAN Play For Free. Obviously, they Need to make money to pay for the service. Subscription companies receive money monthly and from the purchase of the game (including expansions). You do realize, not so long ago, people were calling Subscription gaming a Scam? They said "why would you pay every month for something you do not use all the time?" or "You have to pay them or you can't play the game?" or "You have to buy the software AND continue to pay them?" - "Sounds like a scam to me". These are the things that people said when subscription gaming first came around.
F2P games give out their product for free and obviously add in things that make you want to pay to continue playing. They do not hold you at gunpoint and tell you to pay. They do not lie to you and say you never have to pay anything. Everyone enters the game knowing what to expect. There is no Scheming involved. It is the player's choice. You expect these games to exist on server racks using massive bandwidth for -free-? Please.
In regards to that article, I make it a point to not trust articles from bigoted ragers that cannot use proper grammar (In a published article of all places?). The guy says he gets banned for reporting harassment but judging from his foul wording and distaste for the company, I can assume it was much more than that.
I truly believe 90% of ragers in regards to f2p games are people with no concept of the value of money. Either children or people still mooching off their parents. The other 10% are people that are (rightfully so) not impressed with the quality of work in comparison to Pay to Play games.
I will say now though, I have played plenty of Subscription games that were not even close in quality to most of the free to play games out right now. I've also played plenty of Subscription games that are miles ahead of free-to-play games. Eventually, technology will catch up in terms of cost-effective programming and the competition will be based on quality of content not whether you pay or not. Soon after that, subscriptions and free-to-play will switch roles and subs will be trying to compete with f2p not the other way around. Life is circular.
Despite what we think or even want. The F2P Payment model is the future of online gaming. Companies have already debated it and looked at the pure FACTS and they show that the F2P Payment model has the potential to earn far more money then the money + box model.
There are already monthly subscription games that are turning to a F2P Payment model. MMO's in the future have already started to show that they are imbracing this new model for the future. You have big companies like EA, Turbine (heck even Blizzard has said the model interests them and could be the future of World of Warcraft once the population starts to die off). You have games like LOTRO and NFSW using this payment model. Dozens and Dozens of MMO's already using this model and many more on the horizon.
At the end of the day the studies, quarterly reports, ect. all show that these F2P games tend to make multiples more then there monthly subscription counterparts.
When we look at the F2P model right now we tend to see a substandard in quality and content. But thats not always the case, and the shift is already in full force to bring the F2P quality up-to the once standard of monthly subscriptions.
As customers, we should be embracing this change in the system. We always complain and cry about lack of trials for MMO's and so on at release. Yet, this change, is going / giving us exactly what we want and then some. We get to effectivly play the game without ever having to pay a single dollar unless we choose to do so. The decision is put into our hands if we want to pay anything or pay nothing. No more having to drop $50-$60 for a MMO and then turning to find out that a month later the game was trash and not worth the investment. Thats $50-$60 that could have been spent on other things or on parts of a game that we do enjoy playing.
I have yet to see / find a down side to the F2P model. Looking back at all the F2P games I have tried out over the years. I imagine I have saved upwards of $1k+ dollars in pure $50 box savings if they where to have been sold as a box + subscription setup.
I have been playing Runes of Magic over the last year fairly extensively while checking out some other offerings. But over that year of Runes of Magic I have spent a total of $14 on the game. I am part of a guild that is fairly actively instance raiding and guild sieging. While there are times I wouldn't have mind dropping down another $20 to pick somethings up. But the best part of it was that I had the choice if I wanted to or not. Thats a years worth of gameplay and fun I have had at the cost of $14. Where if you compare that to say World of Warcraft it would have been $50-60 (For the box game + expansion) and that 12 months at $14.99 ($229.88). Thats how much I would have spent for World of Warcraft + monthly subscriptions for the year. $229.88 in Runes of Magic Rubies would have set my character(s) up for life and bought anything I could have thought of in the game and then some.
But but you might be saying. Why should someone that has money have any type of advantage over someone that doesn't pay anything for the product. I have heard this argument dozens of times and the fact of it is. You have the money to start with if your paying a monthly fee for a game + the box. So in part the topic is completly a moot point. But alot of people tend to forget we pay games to have fun (well most of us). If you enjoy a game what should it matter if you support it by buying stuff or don't support it by not buying anything. It costs money (lots of money) to make, support, and keep these games running. F2P developers take a much bigger risk because they give us the option of not paying a penny for the game.
I just find the whole argument silly because we always complain about a lack of options yet when options come our way we complain about the different options that are offered. I am a firm believer that even if every MMO went free to play (had no cash shop or anything) people would still complain about everything.
Yet there is no AAA f2p mmo in the horizon for the future. How do you explain that?
F2P will never die, especially since some of the F2P games out there can compete with some P2P ... People are getting sick and tired of paying for mediocre crap that is buggy and doesnt work ; so they just go to a F2P with already knowing its going to be buggy and wont work but yet, they arent spending their money on it which gives them a small comfort knowing that.
PS - All mammals have nipples.
Get over it already.
What do you define as a AAA MMO? Last I checked NFSW is made by a AAA company and its considered a MMO Racing game is coming out in the next few months.
Again what do you define that makes a MMO a AAA title. If its purely sales / profit then I point you at RuneScape. The game makes more money on a monthly bases then World of Warcraft and has as many (if not more) accounts / players then World of Warcraft. Its also a F2P game.
I tend to find the P2P games more buggy then the F2P ones. With the exception of maybe 4-5 P2P MMO's most of the rest have shown that the P2P quality is not any better or less buggy then the F2P ones.
You have games like, Age of Conan, StarTrek Online, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Spellborn, Vanguard SOH, Champions Online, Tabula Rasa, ect. All of them launched with loads of issues, bugs, lack of content. Yet there price was the same as every other P2P MMO. If you look at pure quality then out of the P2P MMO's there really is only a handful that offer any type of quality and polish. WoW, EQ2, EQ, UO, ect. Even then each of them launched with there share of issues at the time. But yet you still had to pay the same amount.
Yet the same thing may be happening on the F2P market, You do not have to pay anything for them games. If a F2P game launchs in a rough state or lack of content its no big loss rather you play it or not. You can come and go as you choose without costing anything to you. How is that a bad thing when its no loss to you?
Let me show you the most hyped games in this website that will release in the future. Runescape is not the future dude and if that's the future then we're doomed.
FFXIV, Guild Wars 2, SWtor, Rift, Tera, Secret world, Earthrise. These are the most hyped games that will come in the future in this website.
Now who's f2p from this list? None. Then how can you say that f2p is the future when I can't see any hyped f2p game in this list? F2p isn't dieing but is not showing signs that will become the future either.
hype does not equal success. Just look at WAR.
Of course it doesn't. Yeah, some of those games my succeed, some may fail. However there is no f2p at all in the most hyped future games list. So saying that f2p it's the future goes against the facts. I mean what f2p game should we look forward to in the near future? He mentioned NFS, driving game not really the cup of tea for the majority here.
Seems like you missed the other article. F2P is not the future of online gaming; it is just a part of it. That is one of the most general and broadest claims I've seen in a bit over here which, of course, has no support to back it whatsoever.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Depends. If LoTR rebounds like DDO did we might see older games switching over to F2P model. Most of the F2P out there are horrible models with little thought except taking your money. I would not be surprised if LoTR does great for even some newer games that are on the bubble adopting their method of offering the game for free and then charging for various content and extras without monthly fee.
It for sure shows signs that its the future when major companys are taking games that are doing amazingly well (LOTRO). when you have companys like Blizzard saying that it sure could be the future of World of Warcraft and its future games. When you have games like SWKOTOR where Bioware has stated they are very interested in not using a monthly subscription for the game (They have not stated if it will or will not have a monthly fee. But there terms of service suggest something else). Where there terms of service is worded in such a way that the game features a cash / item shop.
Oh BTW Guild Wars 2 is not considered a P2P game. If anything it would fall within the F2P catagory just like GW1 is. GW2 will not have a monthly subscription. You buy the game and thats it, so its not a P2P Monthly Subscription game.
And we wont even get into Tera since just about every knows its more then likely going to end up the route of Aion. Remember that so called WoW killer there that was P2P that all but died within the first 3 months.
Last I heard The Secret World they where heavly considering going the AO right with it that would make it fall within the F2P catagory.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
Ive been following 3 indy game recently after I left AoC and from my experience its really the best option for indy companies. No-one know you, no-one gives a shit about you, so you want to give them free taste of the game. I suppose this could work as B2P and give free trial straight away. Of course there needs to be somekind of catch to get money as nothing is free in real world.
Btw, long time veteran and true MMO hero. I really think World of Tank is going to be next big success of F2P MMOs! So much potential.
Hater of hater of World of Tank. Latest wargame from wargaming.net.
When a game goes F2P, that is not the same as starting F2P for one thing. Another is LOTRO is starting to look and play old, and without enough fresh content, any MMO starts to strugglee. Because its F2P, the subs no longer matter. What I would like to know how many paying customers DDO has, not the number of people playing they keep spitting out. And lastly, most PC games end up in bargain prices, that doesnt' mean that we run around claiming all games are only 15-20 dollars and that there are no Triple A titles left because they all wind up on sale.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.
Is there any type of support that suggests it could not be the future? I have no doubt that there will always be some form of P2P / Monthly subscription for some games. But if you purely look at the games that have been coming out and look at the profitability / where the money is. It shows that there is ALOT more money to be made off a F2P / Hybrid model then the P2P.
When you are turning developers that once claimed they would never go to a F2P / Cash shop setup.. And then the next year they are doing just that.. Well that speaks volumes on where the money is at.
Now I agree it may be much to say it is the future. I actually see the future using some sort of mix of options in the final picture. Sorta like the LOTRO model. And in all honesty there is nothing wrong with LOTRO's adaption of the model. You can go the F2P route if you like or you can go the P2P route if you like.
I am all for options that opens up the markets to more gamers.
As far as hype goes.. I await someone that names a game that had huge hype that has actually done well / very good (besides World of Warcraft). If anything Hype has shown us that them are games we should stay away from. They tend to be the biggest let downs / most bug ridden games. Vanguard had HUGE hype going for it.. Age of Conan had hype going for it.. Spellborn had hype going for it.. Aion was charged as the WoW killer by loads of people and its developers.. Should I just name every MMO out there since most of them always make it into the Top 5 within several months to a year of release.
If anything the less hyped games DDO, LOTRO, ect. are doing very well today. Some might have had a very rough start but look at them now.
Your "facts" is a hype meter of unproven games that might fail to launch or fail in the first months. I hardly see that as conclusive facts that P2P is the distant future. It might be the near future, but if games keep coming out and fail to thrive at birth like 90% seem to do then investments in them are going to plummet. I think a balance of the two is probably the future and if investment keeps dropping then I see P2P getting the shaft on that deal. F2P makes money upfront to create more content while P2P relies on investment and paying back on the long run.
Also in a heavy market with lots of games P2P gets screwed because people will generally only have a one or a few paid accounts. In a F2P market place you can jump in and out of games with little worry. I could play every game and only pay when I want to and when I get bored jump to another. I can not play WoW, AoC, EVE, AION, etc. all in the same month unless I want to spend crap loads of cash on subs.
So the more games that release the less likely they will make money with P2P or they will have to eat each other while F2P just keeps going along like nothing happened.
So the #2 Most Popular P2P MMO went F2P because it was getting old? I find that hard to believe as its held the #2 spot for some time as far as subscriptions went. The fact that Turbine seen DDO do a 180 and become more profitable then LOTRO says some things. The fact that Turbine has decided on a hybrid model for a VERY popular / currently CASH MAKING game also says things. LOTRO feels about as dated as World of Warcraft does with the exception that LOTRO has ALOT more in the graphics department then WoW does.
It's hard to name F2P MMO games coming out. Because for the most part you don' see them coming years in advance like you do P2P games. Because with F2P games it really doesn't matter if they start spending money on hyping there game up 1 month before release of years before release like P2P games do. It's just simple that they do not need to hype there games. You tag Free onto something and people are going to try it out at some point.
BTW last I heard The Agency was going the F2P route. That considered a AAA mmo? I am still trying to figure out what a AAA MMO really is. Even more so how you can determin a AAA game before its even released.
Last I heard from a developer AAA simply ment (and I quote) "Has sold, or is predicted/targetted to sell, over one million copies."
Well if thats the case then how can a F2P game be a AAA game under them terms. If we go by accounts then just about every F2P game has had atleast a million accounts at some point. If we go by subscriptions then well most MMO's even P2P do not fall under the AAA definition, since most MMO's do not have over a million subscriptions.
Lotro is not the future though. The main reason it's going f2p is because it will soon become the past. Do you think it's a coincidence that Lotro will become f2p at the same time these other triple A mmo will be released? Again if you're gonna say that f2p is the future then back it up with facts. What f2p games will come in the future. Don't bring as examples old games that are switching to save themselfs. That's not the future. That's the past trying to keep up with the future.
Your "facts" is a hype meter of unproven games that might fail to launch or fail in the first months. I hardly see that as conclusive facts that P2P is the distant future. It might be the near future, but if games keep coming out and fail to thrive at birth like 90% seem to do then investments in them are going to plummet. I think a balance of the two is probably the future and if investment keeps dropping then I see P2P getting the shaft on that deal. F2P makes money upfront to create more content while P2P relies on investment and paying back on the long run.
Also in a heavy market with lots of games P2P gets screwed because people will generally only have a one or a few paid accounts. In a F2P market place you can jump in and out of games with little worry. I could play every game and only pay when I want to and when I get bored jump to another. I can not play WoW, AoC, EVE, AION, etc. all in the same month unless I want to spend crap loads of cash on subs.
So the more games that release the less likely they will make money with P2P or they will have to eat each other while F2P just keeps going along like nothing happened.
Very good points. I also agree that a Hybrid style model is actually the best choice. A mixture of F2P / Monthly subscription option would be a idea style setup.I didn't say that p2p is the near or far future. I replied to the "f2p is the future" comment. For me both will keep going. So neither of them is the only future. The way I see it the p2p hyped games that fail will turn f2p or shut down. Those who succeed will keep going p2p.
What do you mean a balance of the two anyway. For me it's a cash shop mmo and a non cash shop mmo. You can't have both. When I say cs I don't mean 1 shiny ponny but the typical f2p cash shops. Those on which f2p games rely to get money from the players which for me have no place in the game I want to play.
People have proven time and time again in Sub games and in single player games (dragon age) that they will pay extra for extra features. Thus the hybrid. Right or wrong has no place in the discussion because it is only a question of will people pay or not. And they will.
Soon games will hold back stuff (if not already) that is complete and ready for launch so that they can release it as a DLC.
Kind of like how the SNES was already up and running long before the NES died out but, the company made a logical decision to hold off on it's release to not kill their current product.
Companies already withhold products and content to increase hype or create the illusion of demand. Like how Nintendo held back on production of the Wii to increase it's hype. The company I worked for at the time of the Wii release experienced this firsthand. They would only send 5-20 of them at a time to each company and a marketing rep from their manufacturer flat out told us this was the reason for it.
Companies will always do what is best for them and their pocket books. We should not expect more or less. If players paid more for better content, they would make better content. If players stopped paying from grinding boring games, they would stop making them. So long as people are willing to pay and are addicted to it enough to keep the company's bank account full, they will continue to do what they do. They do not care why it works (addiction or fun); they only care that it does work.
This is the primary issue I have with your statements, this generalization of the future. Sure, I disagree with you on a number of points, which is normal of course, but this is the one I find completely unsupportable. Just think back to all the statements made about changing the game industry as we know it. The future of gaming is changed because:
... Black and White removed the need for menus and now all our commands can be done with the wave of a mouse
.... PS3 and Xbox360, PC gaming is now dead because you've got these all in one machines that are easy to use and supposedly cost less than PC gaming rigs
... Games for Windows Live
... The Sims, one of the most successful franchises ever, still not sucessfully copied or even really mimicked in other games
.... HD graphics are here, everyone roll over, no other type of games will be expected or accepted... and then the Wii becomes more wildly successful than anyone in the industry can imagine
... iPad games are the wave of the future
.... Social Games are the wave of the future
These claims are often used and never realy pan out. I think it's because our entertainment medium is so dynamic, ever changing. Just when you think the mouse has become the wave of the future, you get controllers, and then you get motion control which, by the way, was called a fad when nintendo put it out but no Sony and MS each have their own versions.
I do think F2P is going to have a bigger piece of the pie in the future. I do, but that doe snot mean the F2P "is the future". I think that is just such a broad statement that implies the death of everything else and therefore, is not supportable, in anyway. Every time we think we've "seen the future" something in this industry changes and surprises us. P2P also had a predictability a lot of people love. You set aside your 10-15 a month and its an ongoing expensive. Subscription models work for a lot of industries. They tend to have a low cost illusion in that people think just 10 dollars not 120 a year plus expansions. There is a bit of an unkonwn in the true costs of playing a F2P game as it was meant to be experienced.
parrotpholk-Because we all know the miracle patch fairy shows up the night before release and sprinkles magic dust on the server to make it allllll better.