This way I'm not getting milked dry with freemium cash shops or overpriced subs and I can spend some cash for some cool skin or mini pet to support the devs.
ofcourse I might go for a sub model but only if the game justifies it with free expansions or it's just THAT awesome and it doesn't try to offer me overpriced microtransactions or a cash shop.
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life." -------------------------------
Gonna have to say and I know alot of people will hate on me for this but free to play has been the best way for me to go. At least with this system I can decide whether I actually like the game or not without being forced to either pay upfront or be under some sort of time constraint that forces me to rush through trying to see if it'd still be fun towards end game content.
Now if they ever came up with a way to try out a game at different level tiers and explore a decent portion of all content before purchase I'd then say I'd out right purchase the game if it was a one time fee I won't pay a subscription with gaming never have never will just doesn't sit well with me paying a fee every month to do the same thing. Now if new content was added each month which had a relative value that justified the fee then I could see it but for me right now I could spend 75$ buy a decent game with its content in full be it an mmo or a single player (thats all preference) and be satisfied with it. This is kind of the only thing that has me still consider dropping off upgrading a pc for better stuff and consider consoles every now and again but then again I have my ps2 emulator as well as every other old school console other than ps3 and xbox on my comp so i can play quite a bit without ever getting to bored of one thing or another.
Originally posted by Eir_S B2P with CS-accessible items through in-game gold ala GW2. Best system I've experienced yet. Of all the things I've gotten off the CS, I only paid real money for 2.... because I wanted to.
If the game is a good game, not need shoop, the people can pay his subscription for a real and complete game
All you need is in game and you can get it, just playing....
I really hate see objets in shop/maill when the game companys can make a simple quest/boss/race to get your armour/outfit/weapon/speeder/mount or whatever IN GAME. The other things are just for $$$$ Are u serius? The companys should work more in his games a not in his f... shops....
Down with f2p, down with b2p, bring back the good old days of p2p so our wallets can talk again. You keep making worthy content and we'll keep on paying, you release crap and we stop paying... simple concept.
You want to draw attention to your game? Free trial period with minimal limitations to curtail gold sellers and RMT. Give the choice back to your gamers and they'll reward you. Try and milk me as a potential cashcow, I'll shit in your hands.
"I would prefer a premium world subscription. ($25 ~ $35/month)" - Phelcher
What are some of the features that you would want available in a premium world over the regular subscription worlds?
"PvE Sandbox = B2P with quarterly sub" - Ulorik
What do you envision the quarterly sub offering?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Your list excluded the traditional payment method... merely B2P.
I prefer to buy the game and play it. No subs. No cash shops. If you like the game, you buy the expansions as they are released. If you don't, you don't buy the expansions. Simple model... worked perfectly for years... wish they'd return to it.
That works for single player games. It would not work for MMORPGs.
There is no MMO out there that exists with just box sales alone. You're going to get at least a Cash Shop. Initial box sales will not carry a game that has 24/7 access for 10s or 100s of thousands of people logging on, along with developer updates, bug fixes, customer support and so forth.
They need on-going revenue to be generated, and depending on the box sales of an expansion once a year or so is not enough.
And in case someone is going to argue it, games like Diablo 3 are not MMORPGs with massive persistent worlds. They're Action RPGs with an optional multiplayer component. Big, big difference.
Originally posted by Theocritus I jsut dont get the love here for the p2p model...I spent over 1k on EQ from 2000-05 and have nothing to show for it......I would take any f2p over any p2p any day because you save so much more money.....And what p2p is so great that you guys are so enamored with this model?. WoW? Eve? Theres a reason why this model is dying and that's because its a total ripoff.
What you have to show for it is the time you spent online playing the game, exploring the world, doing the content and so on. You spent over 1k on EQ for those years paying for expansions (physical product) and for the service SOE provides for you to log on and play the game, any time, 24/7, for as long as you like. Considering you played the game for 5 years, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you had fun while playing it, right? Well, there you go. The money wasn't wasted, and you do have something to show for it - the entertainment you received while playing.
You paid for a product intended to entertain, and you were entertained, certainly enough to keep playing it as long as you did. So there you go. You got exactly what you were paying for. That there's "nothing to show for it" isn't some failing of the product. It's you placing an unrealistic (and rather vague) expectation on it.
MMORPGs are not just games. They're also a service. And just as with any service (cable/satelite TV, internet, cell phone service, etc), there's a fee required to access and use it. Stop paying the fee, you stop getting access to that service.
Subscription is a dieing revenue model and its been shown time and time again over the last 5 or 6 years that it is a barrier to entry, retards growth, and makes far less money for the game then any of the other models.
People claimed 5-6 years ago that Sub-based games were on their way out, and predicted that within a year (from then), they'd all be either dead or have gone F2P.
Only that didn't happen, and isn't happening.
To the contrary... There are still sub-based MMOs being made. There are still sub-based MMOs running and doing fine.
More notably, as time goes on, more and more people are beginning to turn against F2P/Cash Shops. Its popularity and acceptance seemed to peak about 1-1.5 years ago. Since then it's been on a noticable decline. People are becoming more educated about the model, are starting to look behind the curtain, read between the li(n)es, and see why F2P/Cash Shops aren't the holy grail they've been described as. Some still cling to the model for dear life, insisting it's "the future" and all that. That's okay. There's room for more than one revenue model and I, for one, believe in more options.
Many MMOs (particularly Western MMOs) being either developed, or converting from P2P are maintaining a subscription option that allows people full access to the game. Why do they maintain a subscription option? Because there's still a lot of people who prefer that option.
The last time I saw a poll of it, it was an almost even split between the two. P2P is maintaining around half of the playerbase, even though there are far more F2P MMOs than P2P ones. That's a significant chunk of MMO players. That should tell you right there that Subs are not "dying". They're doing just fine.
You mention how P2P is a barrier that "retards growth". I'm guessing you're making a reference to how F2P allow "millions more players" to try out the game, hence giving them a larger player population, right?
Well, that sounds great on the surface, and it's certainly the kind of thing PR loves to put out in their press-releases and interviews. Only problem is, it's not that cut and dry.
And here's why...
Of those "millions more who can try the game":
- How many stick around for more than a few hours before deciding they don't like the game and leave? Just because they're "checking it out" doesn't mean they're "staying".
- How many of those who do stick around, do so without ever spending a dime?
- How many of those playing the game are actually spending money and helping keep the game running? Those are the ones who matter, because those are the ones keeping the servers running and the lights on.
When you consider those factors (and others), suddenly having "millions more try out the game" doesn't mean so much. And anyway, P2P MMOs have free trials as well for the same reason: to let people try out the game and see if they want to continue playing.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Subs are not dying, and F2P is not "all that".
Whilst I can understand the reasoning for many for wanting F2P or B2P to succeed (to save money), they are almost always ued by the publishers in order to maximise profits with little concern to the benefit of their customer base.
F2P and B2P both require cash shops for a large cost MMO (B2P made on the cheap could possibly get away without a cash shop but then again would attract far fewer people). Whilst I know people love to argue that cash shops aren't P2W almost none end up that way, they may start with simple exp potions or cosmetic items but over time they will introduce more appealing items to incite spending. F2P games themselves are designed intentionally to promote use of the cash shop, and the AAA titles that have fell to F2P have restrictions that stifle enjoyment without investment and items that offer power for cash. Whilst P2P models have a monthly fee, most F2P games require as much or more expenditure to play without the restrictions they impose hindering the players enjoyment, they even have you buy their currency to help promote the illusion you are not spending cash when you buy X for 300 gamepoints, it all just comes across as underhanded and sly.
The companies producig the games we love are doing so for profit not because they love the genre or care about people's enjoyment. It IS about the financial reward, it always has been and always will be.
Yes it is true that P2P games may end up over a long haul costing a fairly large amount when viewed in retrospect, but look at expenditure on almost any leisure activity and it will either be equally or more horrifying. F2P also has expenditure, even if you are not one of the whales for that game.
I also despise the appearance of cash shops in P2P titles even for the inclusion of cosmetic only items as I know that it is just the start, testing the waters, waiting for apathy.
You mention how P2P is a barrier that "retards growth". I'm guessing you're making a reference to how F2P allow "millions more players" to try out the game, hence giving them a larger player population, right?
Well, that sounds great on the surface, and it's certainly the kind of thing PR loves to put out in their press-releases and interviews. Only problem is, it's not that cut and dry.
And here's why...
Of those "millions more who can try the game":
- How many stick around for more than a few hours before deciding they don't like the game and leave? Just because they're "checking it out" doesn't mean they're "staying".
- How many of those who do stick around, do so without ever spending a dime?
- How many of those playing the game are actually spending money and helping keep the game running? Those are the ones who matter, because those are the ones keeping the servers running and the lights on.
When you consider those factors (and others), suddenly having "millions more try out the game" doesn't mean so much. And anyway, P2P MMOs have free trials as well for the same reason: to let people try out the game and see if they want to continue playing.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Subs are not dying, and F2P is not "all that".
You're missing the bigger picture there.
- How many stick around for more than a few hours before deciding they don't like the game and leave? Just because they're "checking it out" doesn't mean they're "staying".
It's not the number that leave that matter, it's the ones that stay, many of which were able to try and play for as long as they need to decide they want to spend money on the game.
- How many of those who do stick around, do so without ever spending a dime?
The ones paying have more people to play with, so the non-paying players serve an important function. They expand the pool of people to group with, socialize with and play against.
Your third point seemed like just a rewording of the second.
Free to play games don't suffer free free players - they bank on them being there because they are a crucial part of the business model.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I honestly could care less about the payment model. F2p, B2p, P2p, cs/no cs they are irrelevant to me. IMO they are all using the same tactics (ratio of fun/grind) to get people to play, they are all putting in roadblocks to either extend the time you are playing or get you into the cs. They all need to be fun in order to continue playing.
If I like the p2p game I'll play and pay. If I like the f2p game I'll play and likely look at the cs for whatever extras there are, if I like the extra's I'll look at the prices and decide if I'm comfortable buying whatever it is at whatever price they ask. I put a couple hundred dollars into EQ2 because I really like the house building, when the house was built the game was no longer fun for me so I left.
I liked FE for awhile, the f2p limitaions are so slight they are barely limitations (or were anyway, that might have changed) but there was nothing in the CS I wanted or even IMO looked good. Same with TSW, although I only played the first month, there was nothing in the cs I wanted or even looked good IMO.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Down with f2p, down with b2p, bring back the good old days of p2p so our wallets can talk again. You keep making worthy content and we'll keep on paying, you release crap and we stop paying... simple concept.
You want to draw attention to your game? Free trial period with minimal limitations to curtail gold sellers and RMT. Give the choice back to your gamers and they'll reward you. Try and milk me as a potential cashcow, I'll shit in your hands.
LOL .. your wallet ALREADY talked. F2P is the result.
And you always have choices. You don't have to play any games.
Problem is we have noobshere who dont know the diffrence between free2 play and subscription. Some people are getting pay to play mixed up with subscription...
Heres an example
Lotro is pay to play and cash shop...
Eve online is subscription
I prefer subscription as it ensures a better overall quality of player online.. Cant stand udiotic kids in game.
Comments
Because my work means I can only play every alternate month - subscription models simply don't give me good value for money.
For me F2P / B2P works well - with or without the cash shop. The cash shop doesn't matter because I simply don't use it!
Nothing says irony like spelling ideot wrong.
Definately prefer sub + cosmetical cash shop.
B2P/F2P with cosmetical cash shop is fine aswell.
Anything with P2W I measly accept if the game is awesome.
B2P with a vanity cash shop.
This way I'm not getting milked dry with freemium cash shops or overpriced subs and I can spend some cash for some cool skin or mini pet to support the devs.
ofcourse I might go for a sub model but only if the game justifies it with free expansions or it's just THAT awesome and it doesn't try to offer me overpriced microtransactions or a cash shop.
"Happiness is not a destination. It is a method of life."
-------------------------------
Thanks,
Mike
Working on Social Strategy MMORTS (now Launched!) http://www.worldalpha.com
Gonna have to say and I know alot of people will hate on me for this but free to play has been the best way for me to go. At least with this system I can decide whether I actually like the game or not without being forced to either pay upfront or be under some sort of time constraint that forces me to rush through trying to see if it'd still be fun towards end game content.
Now if they ever came up with a way to try out a game at different level tiers and explore a decent portion of all content before purchase I'd then say I'd out right purchase the game if it was a one time fee I won't pay a subscription with gaming never have never will just doesn't sit well with me paying a fee every month to do the same thing. Now if new content was added each month which had a relative value that justified the fee then I could see it but for me right now I could spend 75$ buy a decent game with its content in full be it an mmo or a single player (thats all preference) and be satisfied with it. This is kind of the only thing that has me still consider dropping off upgrading a pc for better stuff and consider consoles every now and again but then again I have my ps2 emulator as well as every other old school console other than ps3 and xbox on my comp so i can play quite a bit without ever getting to bored of one thing or another.
I would prefer a premium world subscription. ($25 ~ $35/month)
"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
I totally agree with you on this
If the game is a good game, not need shoop, the people can pay his subscription for a real and complete game
All you need is in game and you can get it, just playing....
I really hate see objets in shop/maill when the game companys can make a simple quest/boss/race to get your armour/outfit/weapon/speeder/mount or whatever IN GAME. The other things are just for $$$$ Are u serius? The companys should work more in his games a not in his f... shops....
As I just posted yesterday (again), I want everyone to play the same game.
Thus subscription. Or real free to play. But no way of earning advantages through real money.
Down with f2p, down with b2p, bring back the good old days of p2p so our wallets can talk again. You keep making worthy content and we'll keep on paying, you release crap and we stop paying... simple concept.
You want to draw attention to your game? Free trial period with minimal limitations to curtail gold sellers and RMT. Give the choice back to your gamers and they'll reward you. Try and milk me as a potential cashcow, I'll shit in your hands.
PvE Themepark = B2P with CS
PvE Sandbox = B2P with quarterly sub
PvP/RvR = Subscription
"I would prefer a premium world subscription. ($25 ~ $35/month)" - Phelcher
What are some of the features that you would want available in a premium world over the regular subscription worlds?
"PvE Sandbox = B2P with quarterly sub" - Ulorik
What do you envision the quarterly sub offering?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
That works for single player games. It would not work for MMORPGs.
There is no MMO out there that exists with just box sales alone. You're going to get at least a Cash Shop. Initial box sales will not carry a game that has 24/7 access for 10s or 100s of thousands of people logging on, along with developer updates, bug fixes, customer support and so forth.
They need on-going revenue to be generated, and depending on the box sales of an expansion once a year or so is not enough.
And in case someone is going to argue it, games like Diablo 3 are not MMORPGs with massive persistent worlds. They're Action RPGs with an optional multiplayer component. Big, big difference.
What you have to show for it is the time you spent online playing the game, exploring the world, doing the content and so on. You spent over 1k on EQ for those years paying for expansions (physical product) and for the service SOE provides for you to log on and play the game, any time, 24/7, for as long as you like. Considering you played the game for 5 years, I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess you had fun while playing it, right? Well, there you go. The money wasn't wasted, and you do have something to show for it - the entertainment you received while playing.
You paid for a product intended to entertain, and you were entertained, certainly enough to keep playing it as long as you did. So there you go. You got exactly what you were paying for. That there's "nothing to show for it" isn't some failing of the product. It's you placing an unrealistic (and rather vague) expectation on it.
MMORPGs are not just games. They're also a service. And just as with any service (cable/satelite TV, internet, cell phone service, etc), there's a fee required to access and use it. Stop paying the fee, you stop getting access to that service.
People claimed 5-6 years ago that Sub-based games were on their way out, and predicted that within a year (from then), they'd all be either dead or have gone F2P.
Only that didn't happen, and isn't happening.
To the contrary... There are still sub-based MMOs being made. There are still sub-based MMOs running and doing fine.
More notably, as time goes on, more and more people are beginning to turn against F2P/Cash Shops. Its popularity and acceptance seemed to peak about 1-1.5 years ago. Since then it's been on a noticable decline. People are becoming more educated about the model, are starting to look behind the curtain, read between the li(n)es, and see why F2P/Cash Shops aren't the holy grail they've been described as. Some still cling to the model for dear life, insisting it's "the future" and all that. That's okay. There's room for more than one revenue model and I, for one, believe in more options.
Many MMOs (particularly Western MMOs) being either developed, or converting from P2P are maintaining a subscription option that allows people full access to the game. Why do they maintain a subscription option? Because there's still a lot of people who prefer that option.
The last time I saw a poll of it, it was an almost even split between the two. P2P is maintaining around half of the playerbase, even though there are far more F2P MMOs than P2P ones. That's a significant chunk of MMO players. That should tell you right there that Subs are not "dying". They're doing just fine.
You mention how P2P is a barrier that "retards growth". I'm guessing you're making a reference to how F2P allow "millions more players" to try out the game, hence giving them a larger player population, right?
Well, that sounds great on the surface, and it's certainly the kind of thing PR loves to put out in their press-releases and interviews. Only problem is, it's not that cut and dry.
And here's why...
Of those "millions more who can try the game":
- How many stick around for more than a few hours before deciding they don't like the game and leave? Just because they're "checking it out" doesn't mean they're "staying".
- How many of those who do stick around, do so without ever spending a dime?
- How many of those playing the game are actually spending money and helping keep the game running? Those are the ones who matter, because those are the ones keeping the servers running and the lights on.
When you consider those factors (and others), suddenly having "millions more try out the game" doesn't mean so much. And anyway, P2P MMOs have free trials as well for the same reason: to let people try out the game and see if they want to continue playing.
Sorry to disappoint you, but Subs are not dying, and F2P is not "all that".
P2P is by far my prefered currently.
Whilst I can understand the reasoning for many for wanting F2P or B2P to succeed (to save money), they are almost always ued by the publishers in order to maximise profits with little concern to the benefit of their customer base.
F2P and B2P both require cash shops for a large cost MMO (B2P made on the cheap could possibly get away without a cash shop but then again would attract far fewer people). Whilst I know people love to argue that cash shops aren't P2W almost none end up that way, they may start with simple exp potions or cosmetic items but over time they will introduce more appealing items to incite spending. F2P games themselves are designed intentionally to promote use of the cash shop, and the AAA titles that have fell to F2P have restrictions that stifle enjoyment without investment and items that offer power for cash. Whilst P2P models have a monthly fee, most F2P games require as much or more expenditure to play without the restrictions they impose hindering the players enjoyment, they even have you buy their currency to help promote the illusion you are not spending cash when you buy X for 300 gamepoints, it all just comes across as underhanded and sly.
The companies producig the games we love are doing so for profit not because they love the genre or care about people's enjoyment. It IS about the financial reward, it always has been and always will be.
Yes it is true that P2P games may end up over a long haul costing a fairly large amount when viewed in retrospect, but look at expenditure on almost any leisure activity and it will either be equally or more horrifying. F2P also has expenditure, even if you are not one of the whales for that game.
I also despise the appearance of cash shops in P2P titles even for the inclusion of cosmetic only items as I know that it is just the start, testing the waters, waiting for apathy.
I can't think of any Sub game out there without a cash shop, so I'm not sure how that is in the list.
Personally, I've grown fond of the B2P model.
You're missing the bigger picture there.
- How many stick around for more than a few hours before deciding they don't like the game and leave? Just because they're "checking it out" doesn't mean they're "staying".
It's not the number that leave that matter, it's the ones that stay, many of which were able to try and play for as long as they need to decide they want to spend money on the game.
- How many of those who do stick around, do so without ever spending a dime?
The ones paying have more people to play with, so the non-paying players serve an important function. They expand the pool of people to group with, socialize with and play against.
Your third point seemed like just a rewording of the second.
Free to play games don't suffer free free players - they bank on them being there because they are a crucial part of the business model.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
So? The market for f2P is big. So if there is competition, and there is some failure & consolidation.
MANY f2P games are good for consumers. We have choices.
I honestly could care less about the payment model. F2p, B2p, P2p, cs/no cs they are irrelevant to me. IMO they are all using the same tactics (ratio of fun/grind) to get people to play, they are all putting in roadblocks to either extend the time you are playing or get you into the cs. They all need to be fun in order to continue playing.
If I like the p2p game I'll play and pay. If I like the f2p game I'll play and likely look at the cs for whatever extras there are, if I like the extra's I'll look at the prices and decide if I'm comfortable buying whatever it is at whatever price they ask. I put a couple hundred dollars into EQ2 because I really like the house building, when the house was built the game was no longer fun for me so I left.
I liked FE for awhile, the f2p limitaions are so slight they are barely limitations (or were anyway, that might have changed) but there was nothing in the CS I wanted or even IMO looked good. Same with TSW, although I only played the first month, there was nothing in the cs I wanted or even looked good IMO.
LOL .. your wallet ALREADY talked. F2P is the result.
And you always have choices. You don't have to play any games.
Heres an example
Lotro is pay to play and cash shop...
Eve online is subscription
I prefer subscription as it ensures a better overall quality of player online.. Cant stand udiotic kids in game.
Some kids are fine. Bust most are just retarded.