"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
Which is quite telling actually, of the popularity of WoW in the US being insanly strong after all these years.
EDIT - After looking at thier data further, they are also including browser base FTP MMOs (a la farmville)...which quite frankly, invalidates their study in this discussion.
LMAO. So, I guess I'll be putting those numbers in the who cares bin. How ridiculous.
"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
F2P is a nothing more than a bubble. It'll pop. And, all these companies that made the massive move to it (like EA) will suffer.
And how do you know that?
In 2012, F2P players outnumber P2P 6 to 1. In terms of revenue, F2p is making as much as P2P and growing from 2009 to 2012.
All i see is a trend for more F2P. If indeed it is a bubble, show me some evidence.
Do you have a source for that? I was under the impression that there were vastly more subscribers in WoW, EVE, Rift, than there are ftpers in all other MMO's combined.
Thats not even counting the subscribers in said "ftp" games.
Again? It has been posted numerous time. Google is your friend.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
Which is quite telling actually, of the popularity of WoW in the US being insanly strong after all these years.
EDIT - After looking at thier data further, they are also including browser base FTP MMOs (a la farmville)...which quite frankly, invalidates their study in this discussion.
Haven't read the study and don't really care about it, but the number don't add up.
Even if the number are accurate, wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
The quote from Nari is talking about U.S. and stated 8.5 million. You stated that the only stated p2p is WoW.
Wow does not have 8.5 million in the U.S.
Those statements conflict with each other.
Dude, the 8.5mil number is form 2010, when WoW had over 14 million subs globally (excluding China). Please actually read the chart, it in no way says 8.5mil in 2012/2013.
Wow never had 14 million ever. It capped at 12 million and of that there was 6 million spread between NA and Europe. There were never 8.5 million in U.S ever.
Ok I've read the article now and both it and the chart specifically state U.S. It also doesn't mention WoW. Since WoW has never had 8.5 million in the U.S alone, and the article state U.S. the only conclusion is they are talking about more p2p games than WoW.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
F2P is a nothing more than a bubble. It'll pop. And, all these companies that made the massive move to it (like EA) will suffer.
And how do you know that?
In 2012, F2P players outnumber P2P 6 to 1. In terms of revenue, F2p is making as much as P2P and growing from 2009 to 2012.
All i see is a trend for more F2P. If indeed it is a bubble, show me some evidence.
Do you have a source for that? I was under the impression that there were vastly more subscribers in WoW, EVE, Rift, than there are ftpers in all other MMO's combined.
Thats not even counting the subscribers in said "ftp" games.
Again? It has been posted numerous time. Google is your friend.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
Which is quite telling actually, of the popularity of WoW in the US being insanly strong after all these years.
EDIT - After looking at thier data further, they are also including browser base FTP MMOs (a la farmville)...which quite frankly, invalidates their study in this discussion.
Haven't read the study and don't really care about it, but the number don't add up.
Even if the number are accurate, wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
The quote from Nari is talking about U.S. and stated 8.5 million. You stated that the only stated p2p is WoW.
Wow does not have 8.5 million in the U.S.
Those statements conflict with each other.
Dude, the 8.5mil number is form 2010, when WoW had over 14 million subs globally (excluding China). Please actually read the chart, it in no way says 8.5mil in 2012/2013.
Wow never had 14 million ever. It capped at 12 million and of that there was 6 million spread between NA and Europe. There were never 8.5 million in U.S ever.
Therefore someone somewhere is exaggerating by a lot.
You include that in your post, and accuse me of exaderating? You are correct in the 12 million though in 2010. All I am saying is if you look at thier sources, WoW is the only P2P game they confirm, therefore its either the only one they are using, or they are purly speculating in regards to the other games.
You and others may view browser based MMOs as "still MMOs", but in the purpose of this discussion, it makes their study invalid, esp considering facebook has created countless more FTP browser MMOs than P2P full client ones in recet years. Studies that cannot back up their numbers (aside from confirming WoW), should be taken with a grain of salt anyway, esp since Blizzard and EVE are the only wones who announce their total sub base. Even then, they never specify their regional breakdown, aside from Blizz stating that the vast majoraty of their sub losses have come from Asia.
Long story short, don't quote that article in this thread
Edit - Considering that WoW had over 10 million subs in Oct of 2012 (the launch of their latest Expantion, and the last month of their study), its plausable that 6 million of those were in the US, considering Blizzard's previous comments about their sub drops being mostly in Asia. Its unlikely though, but we have no way of knowing, seeing as how WoW is the only P2P game they mention in their sources. This whole discussion isnt even about WoW, its about this bogus study that doesnt mention any P2P game aside form WoW, and includes browser games in their FTP numbers lol
You include that in your post, and accuse me of exaderating? You are correct in the 12 million though in 2010. All I am saying is if you look at thier sources, WoW is the only P2P game they confirm, therefore its either the only one they are using, or they are purly speculating in regards to the other games.
Just look at their methodology page.
They have data across 50 publishers and 350+ games. WOW only one they are using? You are dreaming. Of course they won't show you detailed data. They sell that for a living.
Wow never had 14 million ever. It capped at 12 million and of that there was 6 million spread between NA and Europe. There were never 8.5 million in U.S ever.
Therefore someone somewhere is exaggerating by a lot.
You include that in your post, and accuse me of exaderating? You are correct in the 12 million though in 2010. All I am saying is if you look at thier sources, WoW is the only P2P game they confirm, therefore its either the only one they are using, or they are purly speculating in regards to the other games.
You and others may view browser based MMOs as "still MMOs", but in the purpose of this discussion, it makes their study invalid, esp considering facebook has created countless more FTP browser MMOs than P2P full client ones in recet years. Studies that cannot back up their numbers (aside from confirming WoW), should be taken with a grain of salt anyway, esp since Blizzard and EVE are the only wones who announce their total sub base. Even then, they never specify their regional breakdown, aside from Blizz stating that the vast majoraty of their sub losses have come from Asia.
Long story short, don't quote that article in this thread
Edit - Considering that WoW had over 10 million subs in Oct of 2012 (the launch of their latest Expantion, and the last month of their study), its plausable that 6 million of those were in the US, considering Blizzard's previous comments about their sub drops being mostly in Asia. Its unlikely though, but we have no way of knowing, seeing as how WoW is the only P2P game they mention in their sources. This whole discussion isnt even about WoW, its about this bogus which includes browser games lol
Yes exaggerating. Between Europe and U.S. Wow never climbed much higher than about 6 million.
Why are browser based MMO's invalid? They are MMO's. Not MMORPG but still MMO's.
In 2012 recent estimates are still between 5-6 millionn in NA and Europe. Not just U.S.
This article state 2.5 million U.S. in 2008. They state blizzard told them, maybe.
How did you see their sources? YOu need to buy the article to get that information. Sources are not mentioned in that article or on the links in that article.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
You include that in your post, and accuse me of exaderating? You are correct in the 12 million though in 2010. All I am saying is if you look at thier sources, WoW is the only P2P game they confirm, therefore its either the only one they are using, or they are purly speculating in regards to the other games.
Just look at their methodology page.
They have data across 50 publishers and 350+ games. WOW only one they are using? You are dreaming. Of course they won't show you detailed data. They sell that for a living.
I am not going to sit here and teach you how to read what where...
Lets pretend for a sec that WoW was not the only p2p game they list in thier p2p sources, you cool with them including almost every single free to play browser based game out there in their ftp chart numbers? I'm not, at least not in regards to this discussion.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for arguing that wow does not have 8.5mil today, when it was never implied to begin with?
I am not going to sit here and teach you how to read what where...
Lets pretend for a sec that WoW was not the only p2p game they list in thier p2p sources, you cool with them including almost every single free to play browser based game out there in their ftp chart numbers? I'm not, at least not in regards to this discussion.
Whatever they include in the F2P categories do not change the fact that P2P has declined by more than 20%. Are you disputing that?
I am not going to sit here and teach you how to read what where...
Lets pretend for a sec that WoW was not the only p2p game they list in thier p2p sources, you cool with them including almost every single free to play browser based game out there in their ftp chart numbers? I'm not, at least not in regards to this discussion.
Whatever they include in the F2P categories do not change the fact that P2P has declined by more than 20%. Are you disputing that?
Here is what I am disputing:
The basis of this thread was that F2P MMOs (such as SWTOR, lotro, AoC etc etc) killed P2P.
Then someone comes along and posts a link to an article that first, only talks about the US, and secondly, includes games like farmville in their numbers. If you want to discuss free internet games in general being more popular than client based games that require a sub, I agree 100%. If you want to talk about MMORPGs (you know, the ones this site is named after), you need to provide another source if you want to claim that P2P is dead.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for syaing wow does not have 8.5mil today?
I give up.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for syaing wow does not have 8.5mil today?
I give up.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for syaing wow does not have 8.5mil today?
I give up.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. That also may be what you were saying, but it was def not what he was saying. There is a huge difference between "does not (implies current)" and "did not (imples the past)". Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotations next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game the study quoted, further leading to its validity coming into question.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for syaing wow does not have 8.5mil today?
I give up.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotation next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game they quoted.
Can you show me where they state their sources or where they say that? I can't seem to find their sources. Just take a snapshot using the windows snipping tool.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
I am not going to sit here and teach you how to read what where...
Lets pretend for a sec that WoW was not the only p2p game they list in thier p2p sources, you cool with them including almost every single free to play browser based game out there in their ftp chart numbers? I'm not, at least not in regards to this discussion.
Whatever they include in the F2P categories do not change the fact that P2P has declined by more than 20%. Are you disputing that?
Here is what I am disputing:
The basis of this thread was that F2P MMOs (such as SWTOR, lotro, AoC etc etc) killed P2P.
Then someone comes along and posts a link to an article that first, only talks about the US, and secondly, includes games like farmville in their numbers. If you want to discuss free internet games in general being more popular than client based games that require a sub, I agree 100%. If you want to talk about MMORPGs (you know, the ones this site is named after), you need to provide another source if you want to claim that P2P is dead.
I think the artilce pretty much proves that P2P is in decline. A 20% drop is not in decline, what is?
You are disputing *what* is killing it ... sure .. may be all the web games they include play a role, may be not. But are you disputing P2P is being killed by *something*?
heck, it may even be tablet & smart phones. Who knows.
"Subscription-based MMOs have been on a decline in the US, dropping from 8.5MM in December 2009 to 6.7MM in October 2012. F2P, on the other hand, has been growing from 7.5MM in 2007 to 39.5MM in October 2012."
"The good news is that in 2012, F2P MMOs made more than their P2P counterparts, capturing the majority of the MMO US market’s revenue. The tricky part lies in how to capture and replicate this success."
You do realise that the only confirmed P2P numbers they included are WoW right? Not Rift, not EVE, not all of the "F2P" (which still have a substantial subscription) games. The article should read "WoW", not "subscription based. Seriously though, read the data behind their study. The only P2P game they confirm they took into account is WoW, which makes sense, seeing as they are the only game (aside form EVE) who announces their actual sub numbers.
*snip*
*snip*
wow does not have 8.5 million in the US alone, which is where apparently the study was looking at, so it has to have been looking at other MMO's besides WoW as well.
I consider farmville and MMO, not the same type surely but is there are thousands of people you can interact with in a game setting. A social MMO, yes but still an MMO.
edit - lotro wasn't dying in any way sahpe or form when they switched from p2p to f2p. They were steady and in the black. They switched for the same reason EQ switched, that being their other game did well on f2p.
The study doesnt say that WoW (or "subscription based)" currently has 8.5mill subs in the US...you really didn't even read it, did you? I am not trying to be sarcastic btw.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for syaing wow does not have 8.5mil today?
I give up.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotation next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game they quoted.
Can you show me where they state their sources or where they say that? I can't seem to find their sources. Just take a snapshot using the windows snipping tool.
I updated my quote:
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. That also may be what you were saying, but it was def not what he was saying. There is a huge difference between "does not (implies current)" and "did not (imples the past)". Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotations next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game the study quoted, further leading to its validity coming into question.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions) Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions) Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US) World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions) Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions) Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else About Contact Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions) Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions) Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US) World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions) Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions) Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else About Contact Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
For starters, they are only comparing revenus to a break even WoW (again, the only P2P game they mention by name, yet they mention multiple F2P games by name)? They also dont specify how many of those 350 titles are p2p, or f2p, which makes a world of difference.....that does not raise a red flag to you?
Secondly, why do poeple keep ignoring the fact that their F2P metrics include the hundreds (yes, possibly the majority of the "350") of browser based games?
I already agreed that free browser based game are more popular, but thats not what this thread was about, which is the entire point of every one of my posts. You can harp on WoW subs all you want, the underlying point is that their "6 to 1" study is bogus in regards to this discussion.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions) Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions) Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US) World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions) Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions) Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else About Contact Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
For starters, they are only comparing revenus to a break even WoW. They also dont specify how many of those 350 titles are p2p, or f2p, which makes a world of difference.....that does not raise a red flag to you?
Secondly, why do poeple keep ignoring the fact that their F2P metrics include the hundreds (yes, possibly the majority of the "350") of browser based games?
I already agreed that free browser based game are more popular, but thats not what this thread was about, which is the entire point of every one of my posts. You can harp on WoW subs all you want, the underlying point is that their "6 to 1" study is bogus in regards to this discussion.
Um no they aren't. They mentioned the break even point of wow but nowhere do they imply that is the only aspect. In fact it is below the actual article implying that that is other aspects of informatino that the company has. It may or may not be related to this article.
Hundreds of f2p titles - why shouldn't it. They are comparing MMO's, browser based MMO's are still MMO's.
The point of this thread is that f2p has increased and p2p has decreased. Thats it.
6:1 is totally legitimate if you are talking about demographics.
edit -regarding which are p2p and which are f2p, it doesn't raise a red flag for me right now. I would hope that more specific information would be obtained if we actually bought their research. We are just being given a sample of what they have.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions) Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions) Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US) World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions) Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions) Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else About Contact Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
For starters, they are only comparing revenus to a break even WoW. They also dont specify how many of those 350 titles are p2p, or f2p, which makes a world of difference.....that does not raise a red flag to you?
Secondly, why do poeple keep ignoring the fact that their F2P metrics include the hundreds (yes, possibly the majority of the "350") of browser based games?
I already agreed that free browser based game are more popular, but thats not what this thread was about, which is the entire point of every one of my posts. You can harp on WoW subs all you want, the underlying point is that their "6 to 1" study is bogus in regards to this discussion.
Um no they aren't. They mentioned the break even point of wow but nowhere do they imply that is the only aspect. In fact it is below the actual article implying that that is other aspects of informatino that the company has. It may or may not be related to this article.
Hundreds of f2p titles - why shouldn't it. They are comparing MMO's, browser based MMO's are still MMO's.
The point of this thread is that f2p has increased and p2p has decreased. Thats it.
6:1 is totally legitimate if you are talking about demographics.
Thats where I draw the line is this discussion. I guess I am arguing sometihnhg this thread was not about...my apologies...
On a side note, ill stick to my actual client based MMORPGs.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions) Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions) Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US) World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions) Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions) Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else About Contact Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
For starters, they are only comparing revenus to a break even WoW. They also dont specify how many of those 350 titles are p2p, or f2p, which makes a world of difference.....that does not raise a red flag to you?
Secondly, why do poeple keep ignoring the fact that their F2P metrics include the hundreds (yes, possibly the majority of the "350") of browser based games?
I already agreed that free browser based game are more popular, but thats not what this thread was about, which is the entire point of every one of my posts. You can harp on WoW subs all you want, the underlying point is that their "6 to 1" study is bogus in regards to this discussion.
Um no they aren't. They mentioned the break even point of wow but nowhere do they imply that is the only aspect. In fact it is below the actual article implying that that is other aspects of informatino that the company has. It may or may not be related to this article.
Hundreds of f2p titles - why shouldn't it. They are comparing MMO's, browser based MMO's are still MMO's.
The point of this thread is that f2p has increased and p2p has decreased. Thats it.
6:1 is totally legitimate if you are talking about demographics.
Riddle me this, why is WoW the only P2P game mentioned by name, yet multiple FTP games are mentioned multiple times?
Because Wowis the most popular and dominant game in the market? Because if they are trying to sell their research they better have information available about the most popular and dominant game in the market or the people that would be interested in buying that research would not think it was complete?
Because the other 2 are either quite popular globally (Aion) or the most expensive so far (swtor) and in Swtor's case they made a huge splash and sunk in the MMO world.
Because their data is relevant for comparison?
Because their data is some of the biggest and relatively newest titles to go f2p?
There are numerous reasons why they add them. The simplest and probably most correct, they thought it would appeal enough that people would buy the research.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Battlefield, League of Legends, Sim City... all part of the online market have spoken. The massage is quite clear, that people who play online arcade games, don'nt want subscriptions to games that traditionally never had them.
Why would someone pay a monthly subscription for bf4..? Doesnt make sense, yet it is an online game.
The online market has spoken and it has said that of all the online games in existance... mmorpg's are a niche and not mainstream.
This is MMORPG.com... figure it out.
"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."
Between f2p and p2p I have noticed no difference in quality, content, depth or customer service. They are about the same.
If you think Turbine or Gpotato have the same Customer Service as Blizzard, I fear you are delusional. To quote, it's not in the same ballpark. Its not the same league. It isn't even the same blankin' sport. Content, I agree with. Depth...usually, but not always. Quality, well, no one polishes as well as Blizzard, but if you remove Blizzard then yah even quality is about the same. But not customer service. Not at all.
I do notice that the report y'all are looking at mentions, in that methodology section, the country. I really find no surprise that if you add up f2p's in other countries they're going to out-total p2p. I'm pretty sure Nexon could do that alone. But is that a fair comparison?
Comments
LMAO. So, I guess I'll be putting those numbers in the who cares bin. How ridiculous.
"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
Wow never had 14 million ever. It capped at 12 million and of that there was 6 million spread between NA and Europe. There were never 8.5 million in U.S ever.
Ok I've read the article now and both it and the chart specifically state U.S. It also doesn't mention WoW. Since WoW has never had 8.5 million in the U.S alone, and the article state U.S. the only conclusion is they are talking about more p2p games than WoW.
You include that in your post, and accuse me of exaderating? You are correct in the 12 million though in 2010. All I am saying is if you look at thier sources, WoW is the only P2P game they confirm, therefore its either the only one they are using, or they are purly speculating in regards to the other games.
You and others may view browser based MMOs as "still MMOs", but in the purpose of this discussion, it makes their study invalid, esp considering facebook has created countless more FTP browser MMOs than P2P full client ones in recet years. Studies that cannot back up their numbers (aside from confirming WoW), should be taken with a grain of salt anyway, esp since Blizzard and EVE are the only wones who announce their total sub base. Even then, they never specify their regional breakdown, aside from Blizz stating that the vast majoraty of their sub losses have come from Asia.
Long story short, don't quote that article in this thread
Edit - Considering that WoW had over 10 million subs in Oct of 2012 (the launch of their latest Expantion, and the last month of their study), its plausable that 6 million of those were in the US, considering Blizzard's previous comments about their sub drops being mostly in Asia. Its unlikely though, but we have no way of knowing, seeing as how WoW is the only P2P game they mention in their sources. This whole discussion isnt even about WoW, its about this bogus study that doesnt mention any P2P game aside form WoW, and includes browser games in their FTP numbers lol
Just look at their methodology page.
They have data across 50 publishers and 350+ games. WOW only one they are using? You are dreaming. Of course they won't show you detailed data. They sell that for a living.
Yes exaggerating. Between Europe and U.S. Wow never climbed much higher than about 6 million.
Why are browser based MMO's invalid? They are MMO's. Not MMORPG but still MMO's.
In 2012 recent estimates are still between 5-6 millionn in NA and Europe. Not just U.S.
This article state 2.5 million U.S. in 2008. They state blizzard told them, maybe.
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17062
How did you see their sources? YOu need to buy the article to get that information. Sources are not mentioned in that article or on the links in that article.
Then what are you trying to be, just plain wrong? Your statement is red is wrong, not the one in the study. He's not saying the study is wrong, he's saying you're wrong and he's obviously right about that.
I am not going to sit here and teach you how to read what where...
Lets pretend for a sec that WoW was not the only p2p game they list in thier p2p sources, you cool with them including almost every single free to play browser based game out there in their ftp chart numbers? I'm not, at least not in regards to this discussion.
No...hes syaing that WoW does not have 8.5mil subs in the US Today. I agreed with that, and remineded him that the 8.5mil number was form 2010, not today....
You literally highted the part that said it was 6.7 as of 2012, yet defend him for arguing that wow does not have 8.5mil today, when it was never implied to begin with?
I give up.
Whatever they include in the F2P categories do not change the fact that P2P has declined by more than 20%. Are you disputing that?
Here is what I am disputing:
The basis of this thread was that F2P MMOs (such as SWTOR, lotro, AoC etc etc) killed P2P.
Then someone comes along and posts a link to an article that first, only talks about the US, and secondly, includes games like farmville in their numbers. If you want to discuss free internet games in general being more popular than client based games that require a sub, I agree 100%. If you want to talk about MMORPGs (you know, the ones this site is named after), you need to provide another source if you want to claim that P2P is dead.
No I'm saying WoW NEVER had 8.5 milliion in the U.S. They never got over 5 million there, possibly 3 or 4 million. Which is still a heck of a lot.
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. That also may be what you were saying, but it was def not what he was saying. There is a huge difference between "does not (implies current)" and "did not (imples the past)". Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotations next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game the study quoted, further leading to its validity coming into question.
Can you show me where they state their sources or where they say that? I can't seem to find their sources. Just take a snapshot using the windows snipping tool.
I think the artilce pretty much proves that P2P is in decline. A 20% drop is not in decline, what is?
You are disputing *what* is killing it ... sure .. may be all the web games they include play a role, may be not. But are you disputing P2P is being killed by *something*?
heck, it may even be tablet & smart phones. Who knows.
I updated my quote:
Which is prob correct, but neither you, or me, know this for sure. That also may be what you were saying, but it was def not what he was saying. There is a huge difference between "does not (implies current)" and "did not (imples the past)". Also in what was quoted of me, I listed wow as "subscription based" in quotations next to it, seeing as it was the only p2p game the study quoted, further leading to its validity coming into question.
Here is the entire arctile. There are links to a bit more information but sources are not stated. They do mention WoW at the bottom along with Aion and SwTor but do not imply that this their only data.
Overview
This case study (.pdf) evaluates the performance of the US free-to-play (F2P) market to determine its viability as a strong revenue model relative to the existing pay-to-play (P2P) market. The report looks at the overall monthly active users (MAU) for F2P and P2P and spending in each of these segments. We also use specific case studies (e.g. Star Wars: The Old Republic) of games that switched from P2P to F2P and the changes that the titles saw in key performance metrics.
To purchase a single issue of this report, please click the button below. Let us know if you have any questions.
To learn more about our MMO research, including our methodology, key performance indicators, and title-level revenue estimates, please visit our subscription page.
People who bought this report also read:
Free-to-Play MMO Games Market
US MMO monthly active users 2007 to 2012E (millions)
Monthly US spending on MMOs 2007 to 2012E ($ millions)
Free-to-play spending ratio vs. free-to-play gamer ratio (US)
World of Warcraft break-even point for free-to-play vs. total US market size (millions)
Monthly revenue generated by a P2P title, after switching to F2P or F2P Hybrid ($ millions)
Aion and Star Wars: The Old Republic metrics before and after switch to F2P
Everthing Else
About
Contact
Fine Print
In their methodoly section they state 350 titles, implying far more than WoW. In fact nowhere in the article that I can find does it state or even imply or hint that WoW is their only source.
:
F2P will always be mediocre.
There are already demands for World of Darkness to be subscription based, because we all know what the communities are like in F2P.
Also, the quality of the game is ALWAYS better for sub games, there is always more to offer, and without any additional costs!!
For starters, they are only comparing revenus to a break even WoW (again, the only P2P game they mention by name, yet they mention multiple F2P games by name)? They also dont specify how many of those 350 titles are p2p, or f2p, which makes a world of difference.....that does not raise a red flag to you?
Secondly, why do poeple keep ignoring the fact that their F2P metrics include the hundreds (yes, possibly the majority of the "350") of browser based games?
I already agreed that free browser based game are more popular, but thats not what this thread was about, which is the entire point of every one of my posts. You can harp on WoW subs all you want, the underlying point is that their "6 to 1" study is bogus in regards to this discussion.
Between f2p and p2p I have noticed no difference in quality, content, depth or customer service. They are about the same.
Um no they aren't. They mentioned the break even point of wow but nowhere do they imply that is the only aspect. In fact it is below the actual article implying that that is other aspects of informatino that the company has. It may or may not be related to this article.
Hundreds of f2p titles - why shouldn't it. They are comparing MMO's, browser based MMO's are still MMO's.
The point of this thread is that f2p has increased and p2p has decreased. Thats it.
6:1 is totally legitimate if you are talking about demographics.
edit -regarding which are p2p and which are f2p, it doesn't raise a red flag for me right now. I would hope that more specific information would be obtained if we actually bought their research. We are just being given a sample of what they have.
Thats where I draw the line is this discussion. I guess I am arguing sometihnhg this thread was not about...my apologies...
On a side note, ill stick to my actual client based MMORPGs.
Because Wowis the most popular and dominant game in the market? Because if they are trying to sell their research they better have information available about the most popular and dominant game in the market or the people that would be interested in buying that research would not think it was complete?
Because the other 2 are either quite popular globally (Aion) or the most expensive so far (swtor) and in Swtor's case they made a huge splash and sunk in the MMO world.
Because their data is relevant for comparison?
Because their data is some of the biggest and relatively newest titles to go f2p?
There are numerous reasons why they add them. The simplest and probably most correct, they thought it would appeal enough that people would buy the research.
Battlefield, League of Legends, Sim City... all part of the online market have spoken. The massage is quite clear, that people who play online arcade games, don'nt want subscriptions to games that traditionally never had them.
Why would someone pay a monthly subscription for bf4..? Doesnt make sense, yet it is an online game.
The online market has spoken and it has said that of all the online games in existance... mmorpg's are a niche and not mainstream.
This is MMORPG.com... figure it out.
"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
If you think Turbine or Gpotato have the same Customer Service as Blizzard, I fear you are delusional. To quote, it's not in the same ballpark. Its not the same league. It isn't even the same blankin' sport. Content, I agree with. Depth...usually, but not always. Quality, well, no one polishes as well as Blizzard, but if you remove Blizzard then yah even quality is about the same. But not customer service. Not at all.
I do notice that the report y'all are looking at mentions, in that methodology section, the country. I really find no surprise that if you add up f2p's in other countries they're going to out-total p2p. I'm pretty sure Nexon could do that alone. But is that a fair comparison?