It was a ramble, a long rambe, but a very nice ramble. We hope to hear more of your rambling in the future. : )
Lacking a sarcasm detector, I can only say that I'm in a fairly social mood this weekend, plus a lot of these threads and posts are really well thought out and are revolving around topics I'm interested in, so you probably will whether you actually want to or not!
And about LOTRO's model, $150 is a good deal if you play for years and aren't paying it all up front while knowing you might get bored or wander off a month or two later.
Which brings us to the issue of lifetime subs and six month subs. Don't get me wrong, there's one dev I would buy a lifetime sub from if I had the cash (I don't!). Even though I haven't logged into Xsyon much of late and it has a good ways to go, it's a game I want to see get there, because it's not another quest driven grinder. But other than buying a lifetime/six month/one year sub to support a small dev team doing something really new and different, I can't see why I should risk so much money for something I might be bored of in a matter of weeks (lately it seems to take even less time, a few days is often enough!).
I doubt most of us stay with the games we buy and try for more than a month or two these days, and whether that's because the games are different or because we have changed doesn't matter, it still isn't wise to spend so much up front unless it's in support of a developer or concept that is underepresented. And with all these new games releasing at $50 a pop lately, there's a lot of money flowing into game developers' hands. Admittedly, developing these games costs a lot of money, too. But I'm a customer, not a charity for fast cash clone artists.
I can avoid games that strike me as pure quest driven themepark from the get go (SWTOR doesn't seem to offer anything I would enjoy, that isn't a bash, some people might love it, I just don't think I'm one of them). My problem with voting with my wallet, as I said in a couple of posts is that, when there's a game I do want to try, I want to be among the first ones in, especially if it's a pvp game. I think a lot of us are that way, and this presents developers with a prime opportunity to get down to some serious milking.
If I were more social or had a high end gaming rig (closed beta invites seem to go out to guild leaders and people with $3000 systems more often than to soloers on $700 systems!), maybe I'd get into more betas (yes, I would go bug hunting and I would report the bugs I found, I'm not a mooch). But sometimes playing betas can burn players out on a game, too. Oh well. It could just be time for an MMO break. I haven't taken one in awhile. I hate going to the library every week, and do you know how much books cost (even from the used book store) when you read fast and read a lot? Now that can get expensive!
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
But neither of them played Everquest, Ultima Online.. or watch the industry shift toward casual social games. Nor did they witness anything previous to this year. But to them, a free to play game is something that steals their attention 2h a week..?
Newbs are always happy, because they know no better. Should the rest of the community (industry) cow-tow to their collective ignorance..?
Free to play doesn't matter. Won't matter. Will you still be playing it 4 years from now..? If not then why bother investing ANY time into a character, unless that character can grow & prosper. If all u want is an arcade game, then know this and pley them instead. RIFT is more arcade, than it is role playing.
Traditionally, MMORPGs have been about adventure & roleplaying. Not special moves, or killing blows... (lol)
Secondly, F2P will flourish over the next few years (until they die off), because MOST of the WoW-refugee's don't even know what they like, so they have to try every game that comes out... thus perpetuating the F2P era.
Reason^? ..most online players are incapable of conversing with any sort knowledge base. Therefore, they are unable to directly go after (or seek out) the game structure that they are looking for. In essense, all they know is "themepark" & "Sandbox"..
Which is pretty sad.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Looking at the google docs of the cash shop your $150 price tag doesn't really represent the cost of the P2W model. You should really compare the full cost of P2W vs the monthly cost of P2P.
P2P would be the equivalent of obtaining every expansion possible and using every item at all times in the item mall.
Oh brilliant response there, because ever freemium or F2P is a P2W game, right? OK let me walk through this since apparently you did not look at my first post or the links I provided. The $150 gets you all the areas unlocked with all the classes unlocked. This money also gets you the auction house upgrade, currency cap, and 2 additional character slots for a total of 6 slots. Now with all of these purchases you would be on the same footing as the pay to play customers.
As for the rest of the stuff listed from the store both pay to play and Freemium have to pay for the items one way or another. Legendary item rune removal both sides have to spend turbine points for them. Bag upgrades both sides have to either spend time or money to get the entire bank and shared storage upgrades. Other than that the store is full of convenience and vanity items. But you are so right the store is play to win, there is no way you can compete without it right?
Also for your P2P equals all the items in the item mail at all times, does that mean you spend money in the world of warcraft store since otherwise you are not getting the full game? I am sorry but most of those items are for convenience nothing more! And yes that means some people will buy them just like they will buy a $6 gallon of milk from a convenience store, but it does not mean you need to buy them in order to play the game and compete with everyone else. But good try in trying to distort the truth because you do not like the freemium model!
Definitely. The model itself is fantastic. The various implementations of the model are sometimes great and sometimes awful.
Is attacking the model itself what we want to do? Seriously?
Yes the model sucks, so yes attacking the model is exactly what we want to do.
First of all, can anyone tell me of a Free to Play game that they themselves have played full time for more than 6 months, I bet the list is not very long at all.
The problem is that people dont invest anything in them, sure they might spend money but the majority of players are riding the free wave and since that only lasts so long before the game screams in your face, buy this or get lost, then it boils down to crap short term pointless communities.
Free to play is one of those things that sounds good and initially might look good but simply cannot last, people are already seeing the very poor community worse that some of the really bad communities we all know of, and its all because they players dont feel invested or loyal to the game, they dont feel connected to the game.
and I say that as some one playing a free to play game right now, so its not like im just hating the model from afar, I think if more studios pick up the model then its bad for gamers in the long run.
I think Free to play has its place, companies should aim for pay to play from the start of development, and only if and when that no longer provides enough income to keep the company running, they should then fall back on free to play, like LOtR, it should never in my opinion be a target. only ever a backup plan.
The F2P or Freemium model is better for both the company and the players. If a company ruins their game by making it a P2W then that's their own fault, not the fault of the model. Though people that are against the model are unlikely to change till they find a game that they like that has that model. The more games that come out F2P over here in the west or convert to the Freemium model will only make things better for the model and up the quality of gaming in general.
Looking at the google docs of the cash shop your $150 price tag doesn't really represent the cost of the P2W model. You should really compare the full cost of P2W vs the monthly cost of P2P.
P2P would be the equivalent of obtaining every expansion possible and using every item at all times in the item mall.
Oh brilliant response there, because ever freemium or F2P is a P2W game, right? OK let me walk through this since apparently you did not look at my first post or the links I provided. The $150 gets you all the areas unlocked with all the classes unlocked. This money also gets you the auction house upgrade, currency cap, and 2 additional character slots for a total of 6 slots. Now with all of these purchases you would be on the same footing as the pay to play customers.
As for the rest of the stuff listed from the store both pay to play and Freemium have to pay for the items one way or another. Legendary item rune removal both sides have to spend turbine points for them. Bag upgrades both sides have to either spend time or money to get the entire bank and shared storage upgrades. Other than that the store is full of convenience and vanity items. But you are so right the store is play to win, there is no way you can compete without it right?
Also for your P2P equals all the items in the item mail at all times, does that mean you spend money in the world of warcraft store since otherwise you are not getting the full game? I am sorry but most of those items are for convenience nothing more! And yes that means some people will buy them just like they will buy a $6 gallon of milk from a convenience store, but it does not mean you need to buy them in order to play the game and compete with everyone else. But good try in trying to distort the truth because you do not like the freemium model!
Dude, ur missing the point. Why would u play any of that crap? Nobody cares about F2P games, there is no vested interest as a gamer, to play in such a world. The point of playing these games is building... ur character, ur community, ur friendship, etc.
F2P games are a failed business model (a stop_gap) before closure. It implies last leg. So why bother investing anymore time into any characters within those worlds. Games where u can play them for 5 years + are were the phun is at... not some SPASH FRANCHISE title, that based on money and not gameplay.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Dude, ur missing the point. Why would u play any of that crap? Nobody cares about F2P games, there is no vested interest as a gamer, to play in such a world. The point of playing these games is building... ur character, ur community, ur friendship, etc.
F2P games are a failed business model (a stop_gap) before closure. It implies last leg. So why bother investing anymore time into any characters within those worlds. Games where u can play them for 5 years + are were the phun is at... not some SPASH FRANCHISE title, that based on money and not gameplay.
This has to be one of the most wrong statements in this thread. F2P model and Freemium has proven to be better then P2P in many games. Even if western companies are using it as a last ditch effort, it has proven to be more benefitial for everyone that they've done so. Also community and friendship is up to the players, not the game.
Oh and everybody mentions lotro in regards to teardrippingly successful F2P transitions. So, they make more money now. Hurray for them, and too bad for you, because its YOU that end up paying more for the same thing you had before. There will be people here telling you its because the amount of people playing and using the CS in lotro has just sky rocketed.
On the other hand, it is much more plausible that they DONT have as many people playing as they did a while back, but the people playing are actually paying more.
And the thing that strikes me as increadibly ironic is that this development stems from the lovely term
FREE TO PLAY
HA!
You have no idea what you are talking about. Since Lotro has gone f2p, I have spent around $20.00 total on the game.
There is so much uninformed nonsense floating around in this thread. Some of my fondest memories in MMO's come from both F2P and P2P games. I've been doing both for 8+ year and i've yet to notice a difference in the people who play them. I play PvP games and in both instances the people are just as competitive and friendly as each other. The people really aren't the problem despite the misconceptions of age, bank account balance etc. The only problem is the perception of those looking in windows from having one view.
Generally cash shops make you spend more to be competitive
Generally F2P provide new content more often
Generally the people are the same
Generally the games are just as crap either way, F2P just pump out more of them
I prefer to pay a sub, but i enjoy whatever i enjoy at the time. Discounting either method only limits your experiences as a gamer.
The simple answer is no, it's not what people want and/or need from the MMO market. Companies are not out there to do what is good for their user base, but rather to make as much money as possible off them with out causing them to leave. (ie: Minimal Effort for Maximum Profit)
With that said, the next question should really be. Will the game company of said Free 2 Play game keep enough of the game together to allow it to be "as fun / more fun then it was before", with out making it Pay 2 Win? (Yes I realize this phrase is often missused and abused)
Currently most F2P games either don't have enough core content or it was gutted from the game, to be a reliable source of entertainment. (Most but not All) Some clearly have a horrible case of P2Win, while others are straying dangerously close to that line of thinking.
Ex: APB Reloaded - Initially the store was pretty simple, and included mostly items already available in the game minus the grind to get them. Many of which were honestly not tremendously better then some of the starter gear.
Within a months time however, G1 realized they had quite a few saps willing to fork out money for crap that they could already aquire in the game. So to entice people on the fence, they began offering things that were not in the game, one of which gave a secondary weapon the same power as a primary weapon.
(Mind you it's $10-$15 for 30 days, some are $60 - $75 for life time use for that specific character)
This gave players the option to run close range weapons with a powerful secondary that could operate at sniper distances, which is a rather large advantage over players operating with the limits of the regular game.
Noting the success of the store thus far (Considering it's still in beta), they decided to take content that was already previously in the game. Remove access to it, and re-sell it at the new low low price of $15 - $25 real dollars. - Single use, 1 vehicle, 1 character -
One month folks... Within the next couple you can bet the entire game will be drastically modified around the store. Honestly I believe Free 2 play can work, but it requires a company willing to not sacrifice integrity for money and that's pretty hard to find. Bottom line is, you have to vote with your wallet and stop letting them ruin the very point of gaming.
Looking at the google docs of the cash shop your $150 price tag doesn't really represent the cost of the P2W model. You should really compare the full cost of P2W vs the monthly cost of P2P.
P2P would be the equivalent of obtaining every expansion possible and using every item at all times in the item mall.
Oh brilliant response there, because ever freemium or F2P is a P2W game, right? OK let me walk through this since apparently you did not look at my first post or the links I provided. The $150 gets you all the areas unlocked with all the classes unlocked. This money also gets you the auction house upgrade, currency cap, and 2 additional character slots for a total of 6 slots. Now with all of these purchases you would be on the same footing as the pay to play customers.
As for the rest of the stuff listed from the store both pay to play and Freemium have to pay for the items one way or another. Legendary item rune removal both sides have to spend turbine points for them. Bag upgrades both sides have to either spend time or money to get the entire bank and shared storage upgrades. Other than that the store is full of convenience and vanity items. But you are so right the store is play to win, there is no way you can compete without it right?
Also for your P2P equals all the items in the item mail at all times, does that mean you spend money in the world of warcraft store since otherwise you are not getting the full game? I am sorry but most of those items are for convenience nothing more! And yes that means some people will buy them just like they will buy a $6 gallon of milk from a convenience store, but it does not mean you need to buy them in order to play the game and compete with everyone else. But good try in trying to distort the truth because you do not like the freemium model!
I wasn't referring to the current incarnation of LOTRO. It isn't justifiable to compare the current subscription available in LOTRO to going Freemium. You need to compare the current Freemium to a version of LOTRO that is P2P only.
i.e. A P2P version of LOTRO that would never have gone the P2W route. This version would include everything that is available in the item mall.
Mister slappy happy, Im gonna slap you silly! Who gives a rats butt about LOTRO anyway? It has been in business for several years, and only NOW has it turned into F2P. It ISNT the industry standard for F2P.
The MMORPG industry is, from my point of view, suffering from some serious brain cancer. It keeps reproducing the same thing over and over again, and what was once innovative, is now simply dreadfully dull and conservative. The "industry standard" is now probably taught at school where little programmer wanna-bes are schooled in what exactly a MMORPG is made up of (rats x 10, AH, global chat, nice graphics, repeat last decade ad nauseum).
And enter the F2P genre of the far east. Unlike LOTRO, they start out with a F2P model. Actually, unlike LOTRO, the cash shop and the game play are closely connected. The very way the cash shops cater to your "needs", is thought out well in advance of release. Your "needs" are a result of not even very suble psychology. If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt... Why dont you let go of your constant arguments for LOTRO, and instead face reality:
F2P is evolving into las vegas slot machines, engineered by multinational companies that think first and foremost on the cash shops and make game play to make cash shops sell better - instead of the other way around (which would be to first and foremost make game play, and worry about the cash shop later).
F2P is fine - in certain quantity. However, it is all too clear that it is like a cancer infesting our entire genre. Just look at the front page of MMORPG.COM for christ sake! Free this and free that. It doesnt mention anything about a cash shop untill you enter the bloody game - and then there it is all over the bloody monitor. Buy this, buy that.
I wasn't referring to the current incarnation of LOTRO. It isn't justifiable to compare the current subscription available in LOTRO to going Freemium. You need to compare the current Freemium to a version of LOTRO that is P2P only.
i.e. A P2P version of LOTRO that would never have gone the P2W route. This version would include everything that is available in the item mall.
Oh so now you are using alternative planes of existence to make your argument valid that is awesome. So then you must have some insider knowledge here and absolutely know that they would of added the convince items into the game no matter what for that argument to mean anything. After all that is what the LOTRO store mostly has in it convince items for those that are willing to spend money on it. Or with the way the LOTRO system is setup right now for those that want to spend time in game earning turbine points. Also if LOTRO did not go freemium, and bring in new costumers, could you guarantee in your alternate universe that it would have had enough money to make another expansion?
Also do you even understand that we are talking about here? I was responding to the OP saying we spend more money in all the free 2 play models then we do pay to play. So you wanting to compare the hypothetical non freemium LOTRO to a pure pay to play LOTRO does not matter one tiny little bit.
Oh and one last tiny little thing since you love assuming that pay to play means you get everything in the game, then why does world of warcraft have a item shop. Oh no that means not everyone gets everything, there goes your theory. So no a pay to play version of LORTO does not guarantee that you would have everything that is in the item shop in the freemium, but good try!
Originally posted by Mimzel
Mister slappy happy, Im gonna slap you silly! Who gives a rats butt about LOTRO anyway? It has been in business for several years, and only NOW has it turned into F2P. It ISNT the industry standard for F2P.
Oh so now it is who gives a rats butt, when just a little while ago you were saying that everyone that plays LOTRO is paying more for it now than ever before. So which is it you do care about it and want to make comments about it or do you not care about it.
And as for your comment about it not being the industrial standard, you do realize that a lot of companies are starting to mimic Turbines freemium setup that they started with DDO. Of course not all F2P are like turbines model, there is still some out there that are pay 2 win cash shops that are required to compete. But here is the wonderful part, we as consumers dictate what trends become the industrial standard by the way we spend money. If we spend more on freemium over pay to win then the industry will change to that model, what a interesting thought!
Here is a thought instead of putting all F2P in the same category and calling it evil, why don’t you just talk about the pay 2 win instead of talking about that whole genre. Then you will not have to discuss LOTRO or DDO or any of the rest of the freemium game models. What a brilliant idea, after all not all F2P are the same!
The game was P2P and did ok, went F2P and is doing much better even with the cash shop nonsense.
To be quite frank the game wouldn't have kept putting out the content it is if it had stayed P2P, the money was declining quicker than they wanted.
You're just making assumptions. I haven't heard any word from Turbine on how the game was faring since it actaully went F2P. I'm not saying it's not doing amazing, just that we simply do not know.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I get it. You like LOTRO. And you've played WOW alot. Welcome to the club. I like both of those games too :P You just like to point sharp and witty points at people, and I get that too.
In any case, it just boils down this this - and it seems we both agree: We vote with our wallets. Unfortunately for me, alot of people seems to use their cash at the whore houses, and here we are. You are trying to convince me we are in a convent.
Yes it's alright for P2P games to have F2P options. Let me sub and get done with it. But it doesnt end there, does it? The Maze and Cheese are ready, and the rats are all wild and cheering.
Picture:
We do this for the love of the game. We have a vision of a universe. We make this universe come alive, and we compete with other universes. You will continue to pay us if you like our world. We will our butts of and pay attention to detail so that you will be captivated by our universe as it is.
Picture:
We make a universe, and to get full advantage, we make a cash shop. Everybody understand that we need to make money too. So every thing we do is mostly thwarted towards making money. When I make this dungeon, I will make sure that my program buddy over here will make either all or parts of it only available in the cash shop. We have half our team cutting out bits and parts of the game so you can buy the parts to make it whole again. Brilliant!
To me that's two totally different mind sets. I'm not so naive as I'm sure you would take me for. I know the traditional mmorpg were in it for the money too. But they were more like artists. If they gave their soul, their product would end up being well thought out, a wonderful universe, and you would buy it all or nothing. Their minds were mostly on the artistic side. It is at this crucial point the F2P model is CANCER.
Yes I vote with my money, but it doesnt help, now does it. I just need to get to a cash shop so I can get some vaselin and prepare for the inevitable.
Definitely. The model itself is fantastic. The various implementations of the model are sometimes great and sometimes awful.
Is attacking the model itself what we want to do? Seriously?
Yes the model sucks, so yes attacking the model is exactly what we want to do.
First of all, can anyone tell me of a Free to Play game that they themselves have played full time for more than 6 months, I bet the list is not very long at all.
The problem is that people dont invest anything in them, sure they might spend money but the majority of players are riding the free wave and since that only lasts so long before the game screams in your face, buy this or get lost, then it boils down to crap short term pointless communities.
I think Free to play has its place, companies should aim for pay to play from the start of development, and only if and when that no longer provides enough income to keep the company running, they should then fall back on free to play, like LOtR, it should never in my opinion be a target. only ever a backup plan.
The list may not be very long, but there only needs to be one example of a successful f2p game to demonstrate that it's not the model itself that is bad but rather poor implementation by many other companies. For me personally, I look to League of Legends, which I've been playing steadily for over a year now. Although not an MMORPG, I've invested plenty of time in it, participated in the forum community, worked on excel spreadsheets to theorycraft for it, excitedly read patch notes, the works. And I've never paid a dime for it. Nor have I encountered the magic moment of disappointment, which you say is inevitable, where I sadly realize that in order to compete with my co-players and continue vital progression I must spend real life money.
I don't know exact figures, but I'd venture to guess that LoL earns most of its income through skin purchases, which are complete vanity fluff. LoL has amassed a large enough following that even if 10% of its players purchase a skin or two every month, they'll turn a profit. Add in champion bundles, IP boosts, and an enticing new champion release every 2 weeks, and LoL effectively keeps those who have the money to toss at the game they love engaged. Meanwhile, everyone else who isn't interested in paying barely suffers at all. It's easy to obtain a solid number of champions that you'll enjoy playing without purchasing every new champ that comes out the very week it's released. The new champion is always available to play for free the following week anyway. Not to mention there are 10 free champions to play each week, of all roles. Even a year later, I always find a weekly free champ that I've been meaning to try.
Anyway, enough about LoL. The point is it's a game that uses the f2p model very well. Overall, I'm a very happy non-paying customer. I completely agree with you that if there comes a time in the game where you must spend money in the game's store in order to progress equally and remain competitive, and if that amount of money ends up being greater than the standard p2p monthly fee, then we have a problem. But that's not the idea of the model's fault. That's a problem with that particular game's implementation of the model.
Riot Games (league of Legends) is worth 540 million dollars... and thats a f2p game. That was a year ago... now they are considered amungst the best in eSports so i'm sure it went up. The thing about LoL though is you can honestly play the entire game without buying anything with cash. People choose to spend money because the game is fun. If other games can provide that experience where I do not have to spend money to compete.... then sure why not.
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
Dude, ur missing the point. Why would u play any of that crap? Nobody cares about F2P games, there is no vested interest as a gamer, to play in such a world. The point of playing these games is building... ur character, ur community, ur friendship, etc.
F2P games are a failed business model (a stop_gap) before closure. It implies last leg. So why bother investing anymore time into any characters within those worlds. Games where u can play them for 5 years + are were the phun is at... not some SPASH FRANCHISE title, that based on money and not gameplay.
This has to be one of the most wrong statements in this thread. F2P model and Freemium has proven to be better then P2P in many games. Even if western companies are using it as a last ditch effort, it has proven to be more benefitial for everyone that they've done so. Also community and friendship is up to the players, not the game.
Yes, you are correct.
It has been proven that free to play games are better for cheap, failing games, that need quick income, because thewir long-term business plan (5 yr plan) has failed and they need to stay afloat.
You fail to understand the REASON of all of this.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Ahh.... not so fast. You haven't met my request. You've dodged it.
There are people who will *always* want to level faster, no matter how fast the leveling already is. There are people right on these forums who would tell you that a week to get to level cap is too slow. Even P2P MMOs will give players xp potions or trinkets as in-game rewards. FFXI has had xp bonus rings as in-game items for years now.
I didn't ask for proof that Turbine or Funcom are selling xp potions. I could have told you that myself.
My question/challenge to you was to provide me with one verifiable example of Turbine or Funcom altering the gameplay in a significant way to blatantly push those items in order to make the pace seem more acceptable. Has Turbine increased the grind and/or decreased the xp rate substantially in DDO or LoTRO? Last time I played (~1 month and ~2 months respectively), the pacing in both was exactly the same as before they went hybrid.
If you can provide verifiable proof that they have made those changes, then great. Otherwise, my point remains valid.
"If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
Guild Wars is a B2P game like Dragon Age and Fallout. You buy the box and you play the game for as long as you want. No monthly fee. To say such games have low quality is to say Fallout and CoD have low quality. To say the companies can not afford to pay the developers or keep the servers up is to say that ArenaNet(developer of Guild Wars) doesn't exist or Guild Wars servers haven't been up for almost 7 years now. To say that these games get you to pay more than P2P games doesn't hold water with millions of players who haven't paid beyond the box price.
Examples of what you CAN buy from Guild Wars in-game store:
1. Costumes 2. Extra bank space 3. Extra character slots
Examples of what you CANNOT buy from the store:
1. Gear 2. XP potions/scrolls 3. Unlocking levels/classes/zones
Guild Wars 2 is going to be a B2P game, look at some of the gameplay videos at 1080p and tell me they don't impress you.
II. Free-to-play(F2P):
LotRO, LoL and Global Agenda are good examples of F2P games. Are we going to argue that these games have low quality because of their business model? They tempt players to pay more money than they would've if they were P2P? I highly doubt that, more on that below.
III. Pay-to-play(P2P):
World of Warcraft, Rift, etc. are examples of this business model. This model could've been justified, I don't know, maybe six years ago. Today it all comes down to trust: do you trust the company to deliver content and service to justify a monthly fee of $15? If your answer is yes, that is good. It is difficult to judge when exactly the answer becomes a 'maybe' though. Currently Rift is pushing out content updates like crazy and I am sure most of the customers are more than satisfied by their investment. World of Warcraft pushed out content fairly regularly except in the past one or so years. At the end of WotLK when ICC was released, there was no serious content released till December 6. What were all the people paying $15/mo for? Server upkeep? That's negligible cost. Customer Service? Not needed if players have nothing to play. Development of new content? Blizzard charged separately for the Cataclysm expansion that they were working on during that year. Since Cataclysm, there has been no serious content so far. So count the number of months we payed $15 and the amount of content released(don't count Cataclysm content, we payed its box price) from ICC to today. Some players may be content with this but a lot of players are not(check official and unofficial boards).
IV. Pay-to-win(P2W):
Pay-to-win are badly done F2P games. Their stores give plenty of lessons on how NOT to do microtransactions. I don't think any one disagrees on how bad this business model is.
So in my opinion, P2P works in some cases, and in some cases it doesn't. It all depends on the company and how important the game is for them. F2P and B2P games on the other hand are required to fight a new battle for every new content release. Players don't like it? They have the choice to not buy it. I do not like to pay the companies in advance for the content that they are creating - I may or may not like it.
If an MMO really feels like giving me what I want, here it is: Pay me (a lot) to play a game I love, in the way I most enjoy playing it. Also, cook and deliver three tasty, balanced meals every day, get my mail on the way in, mow the lawn, feed the cat, and send over a personal trainer five days a week. I would also like voice and violin lessons. Although the neighbors probably will not enjoy the end result, as I have no musical ability whatsoever.
Back to reality.
If I like it and I don't feel ripped off paying for it, and of course if I can afford it, I'll pay for the box, per month, or for content, I don't care. I just happen to know I don't like pay to win. Everything else is negotiable.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
Comments
Lacking a sarcasm detector, I can only say that I'm in a fairly social mood this weekend, plus a lot of these threads and posts are really well thought out and are revolving around topics I'm interested in, so you probably will whether you actually want to or not!
And about LOTRO's model, $150 is a good deal if you play for years and aren't paying it all up front while knowing you might get bored or wander off a month or two later.
Which brings us to the issue of lifetime subs and six month subs. Don't get me wrong, there's one dev I would buy a lifetime sub from if I had the cash (I don't!). Even though I haven't logged into Xsyon much of late and it has a good ways to go, it's a game I want to see get there, because it's not another quest driven grinder. But other than buying a lifetime/six month/one year sub to support a small dev team doing something really new and different, I can't see why I should risk so much money for something I might be bored of in a matter of weeks (lately it seems to take even less time, a few days is often enough!).
I doubt most of us stay with the games we buy and try for more than a month or two these days, and whether that's because the games are different or because we have changed doesn't matter, it still isn't wise to spend so much up front unless it's in support of a developer or concept that is underepresented. And with all these new games releasing at $50 a pop lately, there's a lot of money flowing into game developers' hands. Admittedly, developing these games costs a lot of money, too. But I'm a customer, not a charity for fast cash clone artists.
I can avoid games that strike me as pure quest driven themepark from the get go (SWTOR doesn't seem to offer anything I would enjoy, that isn't a bash, some people might love it, I just don't think I'm one of them). My problem with voting with my wallet, as I said in a couple of posts is that, when there's a game I do want to try, I want to be among the first ones in, especially if it's a pvp game. I think a lot of us are that way, and this presents developers with a prime opportunity to get down to some serious milking.
If I were more social or had a high end gaming rig (closed beta invites seem to go out to guild leaders and people with $3000 systems more often than to soloers on $700 systems!), maybe I'd get into more betas (yes, I would go bug hunting and I would report the bugs I found, I'm not a mooch). But sometimes playing betas can burn players out on a game, too. Oh well. It could just be time for an MMO break. I haven't taken one in awhile. I hate going to the library every week, and do you know how much books cost (even from the used book store) when you read fast and read a lot? Now that can get expensive!
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein
My mom plays a F2P and voted... so did my niece.
But neither of them played Everquest, Ultima Online.. or watch the industry shift toward casual social games. Nor did they witness anything previous to this year. But to them, a free to play game is something that steals their attention 2h a week..?
Newbs are always happy, because they know no better. Should the rest of the community (industry) cow-tow to their collective ignorance..?
Free to play doesn't matter. Won't matter. Will you still be playing it 4 years from now..? If not then why bother investing ANY time into a character, unless that character can grow & prosper. If all u want is an arcade game, then know this and pley them instead. RIFT is more arcade, than it is role playing.
Traditionally, MMORPGs have been about adventure & roleplaying. Not special moves, or killing blows... (lol)
Secondly, F2P will flourish over the next few years (until they die off), because MOST of the WoW-refugee's don't even know what they like, so they have to try every game that comes out... thus perpetuating the F2P era.
Reason^? ..most online players are incapable of conversing with any sort knowledge base. Therefore, they are unable to directly go after (or seek out) the game structure that they are looking for. In essense, all they know is "themepark" & "Sandbox"..
Which is pretty sad.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
Oh brilliant response there, because ever freemium or F2P is a P2W game, right? OK let me walk through this since apparently you did not look at my first post or the links I provided. The $150 gets you all the areas unlocked with all the classes unlocked. This money also gets you the auction house upgrade, currency cap, and 2 additional character slots for a total of 6 slots. Now with all of these purchases you would be on the same footing as the pay to play customers.
As for the rest of the stuff listed from the store both pay to play and Freemium have to pay for the items one way or another. Legendary item rune removal both sides have to spend turbine points for them. Bag upgrades both sides have to either spend time or money to get the entire bank and shared storage upgrades. Other than that the store is full of convenience and vanity items. But you are so right the store is play to win, there is no way you can compete without it right?
Also for your P2P equals all the items in the item mail at all times, does that mean you spend money in the world of warcraft store since otherwise you are not getting the full game? I am sorry but most of those items are for convenience nothing more! And yes that means some people will buy them just like they will buy a $6 gallon of milk from a convenience store, but it does not mean you need to buy them in order to play the game and compete with everyone else. But good try in trying to distort the truth because you do not like the freemium model!
Definitely. The model itself is fantastic. The various implementations of the model are sometimes great and sometimes awful.
Is attacking the model itself what we want to do? Seriously?
Yes the model sucks, so yes attacking the model is exactly what we want to do.
First of all, can anyone tell me of a Free to Play game that they themselves have played full time for more than 6 months, I bet the list is not very long at all.
The problem is that people dont invest anything in them, sure they might spend money but the majority of players are riding the free wave and since that only lasts so long before the game screams in your face, buy this or get lost, then it boils down to crap short term pointless communities.
Free to play is one of those things that sounds good and initially might look good but simply cannot last, people are already seeing the very poor community worse that some of the really bad communities we all know of, and its all because they players dont feel invested or loyal to the game, they dont feel connected to the game.
and I say that as some one playing a free to play game right now, so its not like im just hating the model from afar, I think if more studios pick up the model then its bad for gamers in the long run.
I think Free to play has its place, companies should aim for pay to play from the start of development, and only if and when that no longer provides enough income to keep the company running, they should then fall back on free to play, like LOtR, it should never in my opinion be a target. only ever a backup plan.
The F2P or Freemium model is better for both the company and the players. If a company ruins their game by making it a P2W then that's their own fault, not the fault of the model. Though people that are against the model are unlikely to change till they find a game that they like that has that model. The more games that come out F2P over here in the west or convert to the Freemium model will only make things better for the model and up the quality of gaming in general.
Dude, ur missing the point. Why would u play any of that crap? Nobody cares about F2P games, there is no vested interest as a gamer, to play in such a world. The point of playing these games is building... ur character, ur community, ur friendship, etc.
F2P games are a failed business model (a stop_gap) before closure. It implies last leg. So why bother investing anymore time into any characters within those worlds. Games where u can play them for 5 years + are were the phun is at... not some SPASH FRANCHISE title, that based on money and not gameplay.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
F2P is not what we want.
This has to be one of the most wrong statements in this thread. F2P model and Freemium has proven to be better then P2P in many games. Even if western companies are using it as a last ditch effort, it has proven to be more benefitial for everyone that they've done so. Also community and friendship is up to the players, not the game.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Since Lotro has gone f2p, I have spent around $20.00 total on the game.
no we dont
can companys currently coming out beat existing p2p mmos? by publishing theirs with a p2p model: low change
but could they make more money as f2p then them?: high change they do
There is so much uninformed nonsense floating around in this thread. Some of my fondest memories in MMO's come from both F2P and P2P games. I've been doing both for 8+ year and i've yet to notice a difference in the people who play them. I play PvP games and in both instances the people are just as competitive and friendly as each other. The people really aren't the problem despite the misconceptions of age, bank account balance etc. The only problem is the perception of those looking in windows from having one view.
Generally cash shops make you spend more to be competitive
Generally F2P provide new content more often
Generally the people are the same
Generally the games are just as crap either way, F2P just pump out more of them
I prefer to pay a sub, but i enjoy whatever i enjoy at the time. Discounting either method only limits your experiences as a gamer.
The simple answer is no, it's not what people want and/or need from the MMO market. Companies are not out there to do what is good for their user base, but rather to make as much money as possible off them with out causing them to leave. (ie: Minimal Effort for Maximum Profit)
With that said, the next question should really be. Will the game company of said Free 2 Play game keep enough of the game together to allow it to be "as fun / more fun then it was before", with out making it Pay 2 Win? (Yes I realize this phrase is often missused and abused)
Currently most F2P games either don't have enough core content or it was gutted from the game, to be a reliable source of entertainment. (Most but not All) Some clearly have a horrible case of P2Win, while others are straying dangerously close to that line of thinking.
Ex: APB Reloaded - Initially the store was pretty simple, and included mostly items already available in the game minus the grind to get them. Many of which were honestly not tremendously better then some of the starter gear.
Within a months time however, G1 realized they had quite a few saps willing to fork out money for crap that they could already aquire in the game. So to entice people on the fence, they began offering things that were not in the game, one of which gave a secondary weapon the same power as a primary weapon.
(Mind you it's $10-$15 for 30 days, some are $60 - $75 for life time use for that specific character)
This gave players the option to run close range weapons with a powerful secondary that could operate at sniper distances, which is a rather large advantage over players operating with the limits of the regular game.
Noting the success of the store thus far (Considering it's still in beta), they decided to take content that was already previously in the game. Remove access to it, and re-sell it at the new low low price of $15 - $25 real dollars. - Single use, 1 vehicle, 1 character -
One month folks... Within the next couple you can bet the entire game will be drastically modified around the store. Honestly I believe Free 2 play can work, but it requires a company willing to not sacrifice integrity for money and that's pretty hard to find. Bottom line is, you have to vote with your wallet and stop letting them ruin the very point of gaming.
I wasn't referring to the current incarnation of LOTRO. It isn't justifiable to compare the current subscription available in LOTRO to going Freemium. You need to compare the current Freemium to a version of LOTRO that is P2P only.
i.e. A P2P version of LOTRO that would never have gone the P2W route. This version would include everything that is available in the item mall.
Mister slappy happy, Im gonna slap you silly! Who gives a rats butt about LOTRO anyway? It has been in business for several years, and only NOW has it turned into F2P. It ISNT the industry standard for F2P.
The MMORPG industry is, from my point of view, suffering from some serious brain cancer. It keeps reproducing the same thing over and over again, and what was once innovative, is now simply dreadfully dull and conservative. The "industry standard" is now probably taught at school where little programmer wanna-bes are schooled in what exactly a MMORPG is made up of (rats x 10, AH, global chat, nice graphics, repeat last decade ad nauseum).
And enter the F2P genre of the far east. Unlike LOTRO, they start out with a F2P model. Actually, unlike LOTRO, the cash shop and the game play are closely connected. The very way the cash shops cater to your "needs", is thought out well in advance of release. Your "needs" are a result of not even very suble psychology. If you just step away for a sec you will clearly see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt... Why dont you let go of your constant arguments for LOTRO, and instead face reality:
F2P is evolving into las vegas slot machines, engineered by multinational companies that think first and foremost on the cash shops and make game play to make cash shops sell better - instead of the other way around (which would be to first and foremost make game play, and worry about the cash shop later).
F2P is fine - in certain quantity. However, it is all too clear that it is like a cancer infesting our entire genre. Just look at the front page of MMORPG.COM for christ sake! Free this and free that. It doesnt mention anything about a cash shop untill you enter the bloody game - and then there it is all over the bloody monitor. Buy this, buy that.
I feel like I've ended up in the whore house.
The game was P2P and did ok, went F2P and is doing much better even with the cash shop nonsense.
To be quite frank the game wouldn't have kept putting out the content it is if it had stayed P2P, the money was declining quicker than they wanted.
Oh so now you are using alternative planes of existence to make your argument valid that is awesome. So then you must have some insider knowledge here and absolutely know that they would of added the convince items into the game no matter what for that argument to mean anything. After all that is what the LOTRO store mostly has in it convince items for those that are willing to spend money on it. Or with the way the LOTRO system is setup right now for those that want to spend time in game earning turbine points. Also if LOTRO did not go freemium, and bring in new costumers, could you guarantee in your alternate universe that it would have had enough money to make another expansion?
Also do you even understand that we are talking about here? I was responding to the OP saying we spend more money in all the free 2 play models then we do pay to play. So you wanting to compare the hypothetical non freemium LOTRO to a pure pay to play LOTRO does not matter one tiny little bit.
Oh and one last tiny little thing since you love assuming that pay to play means you get everything in the game, then why does world of warcraft have a item shop. Oh no that means not everyone gets everything, there goes your theory. So no a pay to play version of LORTO does not guarantee that you would have everything that is in the item shop in the freemium, but good try!
Oh so now it is who gives a rats butt, when just a little while ago you were saying that everyone that plays LOTRO is paying more for it now than ever before. So which is it you do care about it and want to make comments about it or do you not care about it.
And as for your comment about it not being the industrial standard, you do realize that a lot of companies are starting to mimic Turbines freemium setup that they started with DDO. Of course not all F2P are like turbines model, there is still some out there that are pay 2 win cash shops that are required to compete. But here is the wonderful part, we as consumers dictate what trends become the industrial standard by the way we spend money. If we spend more on freemium over pay to win then the industry will change to that model, what a interesting thought!
Here is a thought instead of putting all F2P in the same category and calling it evil, why don’t you just talk about the pay 2 win instead of talking about that whole genre. Then you will not have to discuss LOTRO or DDO or any of the rest of the freemium game models. What a brilliant idea, after all not all F2P are the same!
You're just making assumptions. I haven't heard any word from Turbine on how the game was faring since it actaully went F2P. I'm not saying it's not doing amazing, just that we simply do not know.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
I get it. You like LOTRO. And you've played WOW alot. Welcome to the club. I like both of those games too :P You just like to point sharp and witty points at people, and I get that too.
In any case, it just boils down this this - and it seems we both agree: We vote with our wallets. Unfortunately for me, alot of people seems to use their cash at the whore houses, and here we are. You are trying to convince me we are in a convent.
Yes it's alright for P2P games to have F2P options. Let me sub and get done with it. But it doesnt end there, does it? The Maze and Cheese are ready, and the rats are all wild and cheering.
Picture:
We do this for the love of the game. We have a vision of a universe. We make this universe come alive, and we compete with other universes. You will continue to pay us if you like our world. We will our butts of and pay attention to detail so that you will be captivated by our universe as it is.
Picture:
We make a universe, and to get full advantage, we make a cash shop. Everybody understand that we need to make money too. So every thing we do is mostly thwarted towards making money. When I make this dungeon, I will make sure that my program buddy over here will make either all or parts of it only available in the cash shop. We have half our team cutting out bits and parts of the game so you can buy the parts to make it whole again. Brilliant!
To me that's two totally different mind sets. I'm not so naive as I'm sure you would take me for. I know the traditional mmorpg were in it for the money too. But they were more like artists. If they gave their soul, their product would end up being well thought out, a wonderful universe, and you would buy it all or nothing. Their minds were mostly on the artistic side. It is at this crucial point the F2P model is CANCER.
Yes I vote with my money, but it doesnt help, now does it. I just need to get to a cash shop so I can get some vaselin and prepare for the inevitable.
The list may not be very long, but there only needs to be one example of a successful f2p game to demonstrate that it's not the model itself that is bad but rather poor implementation by many other companies. For me personally, I look to League of Legends, which I've been playing steadily for over a year now. Although not an MMORPG, I've invested plenty of time in it, participated in the forum community, worked on excel spreadsheets to theorycraft for it, excitedly read patch notes, the works. And I've never paid a dime for it. Nor have I encountered the magic moment of disappointment, which you say is inevitable, where I sadly realize that in order to compete with my co-players and continue vital progression I must spend real life money.
I don't know exact figures, but I'd venture to guess that LoL earns most of its income through skin purchases, which are complete vanity fluff. LoL has amassed a large enough following that even if 10% of its players purchase a skin or two every month, they'll turn a profit. Add in champion bundles, IP boosts, and an enticing new champion release every 2 weeks, and LoL effectively keeps those who have the money to toss at the game they love engaged. Meanwhile, everyone else who isn't interested in paying barely suffers at all. It's easy to obtain a solid number of champions that you'll enjoy playing without purchasing every new champ that comes out the very week it's released. The new champion is always available to play for free the following week anyway. Not to mention there are 10 free champions to play each week, of all roles. Even a year later, I always find a weekly free champ that I've been meaning to try.
Anyway, enough about LoL. The point is it's a game that uses the f2p model very well. Overall, I'm a very happy non-paying customer. I completely agree with you that if there comes a time in the game where you must spend money in the game's store in order to progress equally and remain competitive, and if that amount of money ends up being greater than the standard p2p monthly fee, then we have a problem. But that's not the idea of the model's fault. That's a problem with that particular game's implementation of the model.
Riot Games (league of Legends) is worth 540 million dollars... and thats a f2p game. That was a year ago... now they are considered amungst the best in eSports so i'm sure it went up. The thing about LoL though is you can honestly play the entire game without buying anything with cash. People choose to spend money because the game is fun. If other games can provide that experience where I do not have to spend money to compete.... then sure why not.
"Sometimes people say stuff they don''t mean, but more often then that they don''t say things they do mean"
Yes, you are correct.
It has been proven that free to play games are better for cheap, failing games, that need quick income, because thewir long-term business plan (5 yr plan) has failed and they need to stay afloat.
You fail to understand the REASON of all of this.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
Ahh.... not so fast. You haven't met my request. You've dodged it.
There are people who will *always* want to level faster, no matter how fast the leveling already is. There are people right on these forums who would tell you that a week to get to level cap is too slow. Even P2P MMOs will give players xp potions or trinkets as in-game rewards. FFXI has had xp bonus rings as in-game items for years now.
I didn't ask for proof that Turbine or Funcom are selling xp potions. I could have told you that myself.
My question/challenge to you was to provide me with one verifiable example of Turbine or Funcom altering the gameplay in a significant way to blatantly push those items in order to make the pace seem more acceptable. Has Turbine increased the grind and/or decreased the xp rate substantially in DDO or LoTRO? Last time I played (~1 month and ~2 months respectively), the pacing in both was exactly the same as before they went hybrid.
If you can provide verifiable proof that they have made those changes, then great. Otherwise, my point remains valid.
and the cash shop selling asphalt..." - Mimzel on F2P/Cash Shops
I. Buy-to-play(B2P):
Guild Wars is a B2P game like Dragon Age and Fallout. You buy the box and you play the game for as long as you want. No monthly fee. To say such games have low quality is to say Fallout and CoD have low quality. To say the companies can not afford to pay the developers or keep the servers up is to say that ArenaNet(developer of Guild Wars) doesn't exist or Guild Wars servers haven't been up for almost 7 years now. To say that these games get you to pay more than P2P games doesn't hold water with millions of players who haven't paid beyond the box price.
Examples of what you CAN buy from Guild Wars in-game store:
1. Costumes 2. Extra bank space 3. Extra character slots
Examples of what you CAN NOT buy from the store:
1. Gear 2. XP potions/scrolls 3. Unlocking levels/classes/zones
Guild Wars 2 is going to be a B2P game, look at some of the gameplay videos at 1080p and tell me they don't impress you.
II. Free-to-play(F2P):
LotRO, LoL and Global Agenda are good examples of F2P games. Are we going to argue that these games have low quality because of their business model? They tempt players to pay more money than they would've if they were P2P? I highly doubt that, more on that below.
III. Pay-to-play(P2P):
World of Warcraft, Rift, etc. are examples of this business model. This model could've been justified, I don't know, maybe six years ago. Today it all comes down to trust: do you trust the company to deliver content and service to justify a monthly fee of $15? If your answer is yes, that is good. It is difficult to judge when exactly the answer becomes a 'maybe' though. Currently Rift is pushing out content updates like crazy and I am sure most of the customers are more than satisfied by their investment. World of Warcraft pushed out content fairly regularly except in the past one or so years. At the end of WotLK when ICC was released, there was no serious content released till December 6. What were all the people paying $15/mo for? Server upkeep? That's negligible cost. Customer Service? Not needed if players have nothing to play. Development of new content? Blizzard charged separately for the Cataclysm expansion that they were working on during that year. Since Cataclysm, there has been no serious content so far. So count the number of months we payed $15 and the amount of content released(don't count Cataclysm content, we payed its box price) from ICC to today. Some players may be content with this but a lot of players are not(check official and unofficial boards).
IV. Pay-to-win(P2W):
Pay-to-win are badly done F2P games. Their stores give plenty of lessons on how NOT to do microtransactions. I don't think any one disagrees on how bad this business model is.
So in my opinion, P2P works in some cases, and in some cases it doesn't. It all depends on the company and how important the game is for them. F2P and B2P games on the other hand are required to fight a new battle for every new content release. Players don't like it? They have the choice to not buy it. I do not like to pay the companies in advance for the content that they are creating - I may or may not like it.
Nice breakdown, Wyzim.
If an MMO really feels like giving me what I want, here it is: Pay me (a lot) to play a game I love, in the way I most enjoy playing it. Also, cook and deliver three tasty, balanced meals every day, get my mail on the way in, mow the lawn, feed the cat, and send over a personal trainer five days a week. I would also like voice and violin lessons. Although the neighbors probably will not enjoy the end result, as I have no musical ability whatsoever.
Back to reality.
If I like it and I don't feel ripped off paying for it, and of course if I can afford it, I'll pay for the box, per month, or for content, I don't care. I just happen to know I don't like pay to win. Everything else is negotiable.
I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.
~Albert Einstein