Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
LOTRO Revenue Doubled since going F2P
.jpg){kind=avatar}
Axehilt
Member RarePosts: 10,504
More evidence of F2P being a good move for companies. Unfortunately I'm not aware of the specific items in LOTRO's store to make a comment on whether it's great for players or not (well-designed item shops make F2Ps fantastic for players by not ruining gameplay; but most MMORPGs have poorly-designed item shops which compromise gameplay.)
Article (10/7/2010):
http://www.joystiq.com/2010/10/07/lord-of-the-rings-online-doubles-revenue-since-going-free-to-pla/
Full Text:
"Lord of the Rings Online Executive Producer Kate Paiz announced during a panel at GDC Online 2010 today that Turbine has done it again: Lord of the Rings Online has doubled its revenue and created over a million new accounts since going free-to-play early last month. That's the second MMO Turbine has taken from a paid subscription to a hybrid microtransactions-based business model, with Dungeons and Dragons Online doing the same thing last year (important to note: Paiz was in charge of both transitions, switching to LotRO in July). Paiz told us after the panel that LotRO wasn't in trouble, but rather that Turbine did the math and decided the switch would work. "We knew there was more out there for us," she said.
Paiz also shared that 20% of LotRO's former players have returned to the game since the switchover, and that the game has seen a 300% increase in peak concurrency, with three times the number of players online simultaneously, and a 400% increase in active players total. 53% of players have used the in-game microtransaction store (which sells everything from mounts and outfits to XP boosts and character slots), and as you can see above, extra storage slots are extremely popular in the store. And even paid subscriptions have increased. Turbine's lesson seems to be that, as Paiz said during the panel, "when you tell people you no longer have to pay for it, they come in droves.":
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Comments
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/294216/Numbers-in-for-LOTRO-F2P-Conversion.html
Has been posted here
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
AWESOME!
Thanks for the share.
Well they have quest packs, which bind to account, not player, they have bag addons, which bind to account, remove credit cap, more character slots, etc.
I think LOTRO is the best for previously subbing pkayers who go free to play, because we get all the expansions and a lot of other stuff off the hop, even if we're no longer subbed.
Jumping in before this goes downhill, and it will ;P! The only thing in the store that's really questionable are Morale(health) and power pots - that are only available in the store (They're a different kind than are produced by scholars/dropped). I don't feel they're needed, or OP - however I don't agree that they should only be available in store. However, you WILL have people stating that they're game-breaking - and that Turbine is now going to design encounters around them (or already has - what a joke THAT is).
The numbers are interesting, but it's only been a month - and those numbers don't really say alot. However, what can be inferred by Kate's interview is that it did go well. I really think judging by the first month is a little premature. We'll have to see if they come out with more numbers (like they did for DDO at 8 months). All I can say from personal experience is that it IS busier - both in the "free" areas, and also in the lower level "paid" areas. Take from that what you will.
Good job Turbine, hope you have continued success!
Players breed players... thats how wow got so big and epic.
1m new accounts may not seem like much, but if 50% of those are paying then soon their friends will be paying too.. and it has a snowball effect..
Our Kin is a good example, 3/4 players just thought they'd have a go, liked it, started paying, then suddenly their other friends are coming to check it out.. our kin which started on a fresh server already has about 3 generations of players in.
We're not sure how much milage is in it though, we may get bored after a few months.. but thats enough time for turbine to get some more content out
Isn't it obvious that the revenue would increase with the switch to P2W. I think the 20% returning players is a more important statistic, but I am interested if that actually means players that had quite during P2P payment model, or players that continued to play after the switch to P2W.
I wonder how many of those new accounts are bots.
The only reason why its obvious is because Turbine made it a success with DDO, previously going f2p from sub hasnt really worked out (remember RF Online?)
So yea, I guess its obvious, but still the numbers are interesting! And I agree that the returning players bit is also interesting but whats even MORE interesting is that still, F2P is not yet out in Europe, so there is still a twist to this tale yet
The twist is that they only talk percentages (20% of LotRO's former players have returned to the game since the switchover, and that the game has seen a 300% increase in peak concurrency, with three times the number of players online simultaneously, and a 400% increase in active players total. 53% of players have used the in-game microtransaction store (which sells everything from mounts and outfits to XP boosts and character slots), and as you can see above, extra storage slots are extremely popular in the store. And even paid subscriptions have increased. )
Everyone speaks about ... numbers.
But the only thing I see are percentages without ANY back up of hard $ signs.
Of course they had an increase of people having a peep. It's open for everyone.
Easy to invent % when the hardcore numbers are not even referenced to.
300% increase of 1 is 3.
^ they doubled their revenue. what else of hard $ do you want?
Since when is "doubling" a number or a dollar sign ?
And what revenue and compared to what income ? A launching month ?
Doubling is 200% ...
200% of 1 is 2.
Sort of a mixed blessing, great to hear it is a financial success and has breathed new life into the game, unfortunate in that I don't care for the model and their good fortune will encourage other dev's to follow suit.
Which might be fine except I don't trust that all Devs will do it so well, (ie. See EQ 2 for how not to do it)
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Not many mmo release $ numbers, but the game is clearly doing well with 15 servers constantly full.
You can probably work out a rough estimate yourself.
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
To each their own. I personally prefer EQ2's way of doing it.
<p align="center" style="font-family: arial;"><a href="http://www.wizards.com/magic/playmagic/whatcolorareyou.asp"; target="_blank"><img src="http://www.wizards.com/magic/images/whatcolor_isblue.jpg"; border="0"><br/><b>Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.</b></a></p>
You may have all the paid fun in the world with the game you love.
I only wanted to point out that if you give % (percentages) without any references to actual numbers, you are not communicating with a decent argument.
My guess is that their monthly income was already extreme low to begin with.
I don't see any other reason to give 200% of this and 53% of that and 300% of players visiting.
The bottom line is always the $$ signs and like I said: "revenue doubled" is meaningless if you don't give ANY reference to time, period and history.
It may be one of the reasons EU is not "free" yet: so they will have a reference for the first 3 months with P2P.
I think your a hypocrite. If you think they purposely take their worse profit month and use that as a compare, you are nuts.
They most likely mean last month.
I understand what you mean. When people are telling me how great DDO's item shop is, and how every other over priced F2P company should lower their item shop price. I just tell them they are nuts, since even though DDO's profit tripled but it's probably not much in the first place.
But I doubt they actually lied about doubling their revenue, which is most likely comparing to last month. And I think lotro is on the top 10 most profitable MMO last year according to ford? (not sure, need to check on that))
ooh, yea I can see where percentages might create an auto-spark of suspicion.
But I think thats just the way companys think, I help to run a company in the UK to and most of the time you do talk in percentages because making money is about margin! Margin is just really about how much profit you make from your expenditure... and thats why Turbine are boasting, its because its a signal to other competative companys who know the real implication behind them.
The figures are irrelevent really, competative organisations will already know the baseline numbers for which these percentages are effecting.
They do say 'over a million new accounts' of which 50% have made a transaction, so i'd say 500'000 new customers is a good day in anyone's book
Now thats the extra.. everyone likes to know what they've got ontop of what they already have.. but when what you already have grows by 20% as well, it doesnt really matter what you had, 20% core growth means that you can at least afford to plan to commit more resources re-investing. Which for players means more content, updates and expansions
While it currently is f2p it wasn't developed with that type of income in mind. Box sales, life time subs and monthly subs must have paid alot of the development costs back. I don't think they would be able to start with f2p with this size of game in mind. The switch might be good but lets make sure we remember who paid the development costs for this.
Of course it is too early to see if the move has been successful, but I see a lot of new players and the servers are way more busy than before, even considering the 4 new ones.
Now Turbine just need to get a good expac to suck it the old players and to get widen the endgaming, and I'm positive we will see a new expac somewhere this winter.
Most likely ? Perhaps: why didn't they show you the hard $ earned then ?
Most likely is because these exact figures were not very bright either.
Most likely is that only talking % makes people believe their decision was awesome.
Like the guy above already deducted: 1M new accounts, let's say they now have the equivalent of 500 K subs.
it doesn't work that way: a company doesn't work with %, they work with $$$.
I think hiding behind % and not giving the figures is hypocrite.
It proves nothing yet, it was expected that a game going F2P will sell a lot of stuff during the first few months.
If the number is still as high next autumn you have your proof, but you need to wait at least 6 months to see how things work out.
Revenue is a meaningless number without costs. With all the advertising they have been doing, plus any increased cost in supporting more players, creating the item shops, ect ect. You would need to see those versus what the books looked like before the change to really know if their move was wise.
Sent me an email if you want me to mail you some pizza rolls.
Why would they release $ numbers? they are not a public company...
March on! - Lets Invade Pekopon
The figures are only really impressive if they are sustainable. A lot of the stuff for sale in the cash shop is one time purchases (I assume). Once every player willing to play the game on a regular basis has downloaded it and made the purchases necessary to play the game without major annoyances (bag space, content unlocks), will they still make more money each month than with a subscription model? Probably, but only time will tell. Double the revenue during the first month is a lot less than I expected.
Ya, I can understand what you mean. Obviously the CEO's is trying to make it sounds good as a marketing strategy. To draw more crowds.
You mean he is doing his job?
But I think it is more about stock prices and less about attracting crowds that way, they have advertising to get the crowds.