I think the question is wrong. I think it's more like can F2P survive. So much more competition among titles now, So many choices and so many mediocre games. GW2 was supposed to usher in a new billing model revolution. NCSoft has reported a decline in profits from GW2 and it's next Western release is going to be subscription based. Why did NCSoft abandon B2P? Obviously, there are many more factors in that decision, I get that, but if the Cash Shop generated revenue and boxed fees is as profitable as people hoped, there'd be no reason to ever go for a sub model again. But yet here we are.
FF14 is going P2P
ESO is going P2P
WildStar is going P2P
There are links in this forum right now discussing SWTOR and speculations that model is not as profitable as EA wants. There are discussions arguing over GW2's profitability. The most successful Western Theme Park (WoW) and the most successful Western sand box (EVE) are both still P2P models.
IMO, the argument has never been, nor should it ever be about the business model. The argument is about the quality of games. If you have a quality product, people will pay for it.
GW2 was never ushering in any new billing model revolution. They had very strategic marketing, positioning against subscription while avoiding the F2P stigma, brilliantly selling the mantra of "Just buy it and play it" to rake in truckloads of cash on a box fee for what is an item mall game. Subscription fans rejoiced because they perceived it as "subscription quality" without the monthly fee, and F2P fans rejoiced because they perceived the box fee as a sign that more money would go into creating a quality game for them.
That aside, your conclusion that it should be about quality is correct but very skewed, as it makes the leap from "they will pay for quality" to "they will pay for quality by business model x", the latter only being true if business model x aligns with how the target audience wants to pay for their MMO entertainment.
My statement about GW2 wasn't from ANET/NCSOFT's perspective, but from the player's. A year and a half ago, this board, along with others like guru, were filled with threads about B2P this and B2P that and "paradigm shifts" and changing the way we "MMORPG" and all that nonsense. So yes, there is some validity to what I said. (And admittedly a touch of hyperbole)
as for the main point of my post, I have said in the past. The business model has to match the product. This was SWTOR's problem. The game itself wasn't bad per se, bu it didn't have the longevity that would be required to charge a monthly fee for.
Yes, my post was simplified, but let's at least assume we are talking about the kind of game that should match this model in the 1st place. Most of us can say we would like an MMORPG that will be around long term.
Cool, I understand your post better now. Thanks for explaining that.
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
And this is a good reason why games that are P2P fail. No offense to you intended, but really and truly you are the reason P2P fails devs cater to you. So the rest of the MMO world burn through the little leveling content there is quickly. Then get bored and hang out in that game's version of orgrimmar being bored because the content was burnt to fast. So they go "Fuck this game ain't worth 15 bucks a month." and bail.
And the market works as it should.
If most players don't want to spend 6 month leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves.
And sub-only games failing is not a bad thing if people want to game hop and don't want a stable, every month $15 game.
How do we know most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling. Name the last game that had 6 months leveling? For that matter name the last game that failed because it took to long to reach max level. I know Vanilla Wow had a long leveling curve. It took longer to get from 1-60 than it does to get to 1-90 now and I would bet 1-90 in wow quit play a different game and get to max level in that one.
If people are getting to max level quickly and then bitch there is nothing to do so they bail. That leads me to believe they want more game to play. If they had that "extra" game being the time it takes to get to that max level then they might not complain as much about not having things to do.
Game hoping comes from boredom. Boredom comes from lack of game to play. Lack of game to play comes from chewing up what is available extremely quickly.
This is a very very excellent thread. As I am reading through alot of the comments about f2p being a dieing fad already, I am excited about gaming again. I had become fed up with f2p and the support it has, but threads like this make it clear that p2p has some excellent support as well and people really post some intelligent comments arguing thier side.
As I mentioned I had become fed up, so much to the point that I sold all of my pc equipment. Now with ESO and Wildstar taking the high road, I can see a future in the pc gaming world again.
P2p for the sake of gaming please, when I look at what mmorpg titles are available, the first thing I do is look at the pay model. The second thing I do is disregard all f2p games as a playable option.
Why would people pay a monthly subscription for Wildstar in 2013 when there's a lot of F2P or B2P mmorpgs already.
I know i won't. Why would i even pay a cent when there are so many fun f2p games? I don't even have enough time to finish all the free content.
I like how you quoted me, but deleted every single word that i myself wrote as the part that you quoted is what you yourself wrote. Here's the words you forgot to read.
Did you seriously ask that question? Are you that dense? People spend money because they find whatever they're spending that money on to be WORTH the cost. Since we're talking about mmorpgs, that worth is defined in how much enjoyment/fun will the person have.
If they feel Wildstar is going to provide them immense fun, then they're going pay a subscription for it. If a person doesn't find GW2 fun after buying it, are they going to throw their money at the cash shop even though they hate the game, or are they gonna uninstall and forget about it?
Did you seriously ask that question?
Its....not...rocket science. Trying so hard not to get banned again but you people are making it so hard.
MMO's these days are very much a different breed than the ones released in the era of Everquest, EvE, and WoW. Back in 2004 releasing a mmo with attached monthly fees was the norm, and quite a few games became wildly successful because of it (both financially and garnering the respect of customers). The MMO scene currently is a very different beast...
Before I rag on upcoming p2p mmo's, lets take a look at the currently successes. First you have WoW the grandfather of the modern mmo, and probably the last great p2p mmo as well. WoW continues to be a p2p power mainly through Blizzards groundwork laid almost 10 years ago but also because it was the first to bring the mmo genre to the masses. Another continual success for the p2p mmo's is EvE online which has achieved a continuous growth of player subs for over 10 years. CCP managed this, in my opinion, by providing the players an ever change and evolving universe that puts your sub money to good use.
Now lets take a look at what the upcoming p2p mmo wildstar has to go up against. First you have the B2P juggernaut GW2. Whether you like ANet's style of mmo's or not you have to commend them for producing a game that only requires one purchase to play. ANet has been providing content updates that have far out striped or equaled what you usually get in a P2P mmo (for your 15$) all for free.
This brings me to my main point, how can any new p2p mmo possibly come up with a reasonable and defensible answer to why they need a monthly stipend from you, in addition to the base game cost? Now I will digress for a second to say that the only P2P mmo I have encountered that made me feel as if my monthly fee was warranted, was EvE online (mainly because your monthly fee went to server architecture that actually needed maintenance and free expansions). I for one see no way a new P2P mmo can justify the need for having a large $15/month fee, unless they produce content on the scale and size of GW2's or they provide expansion style content packs for free like EvE. Long gone are the myths around needing this $15 for server upkeep and costs (http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=av26nr&s=6).
In conclusion I will be hoping for more innovative and risk taking p2p mmo's in the future, as they are my preferred style of mmo, sadly I do not see any upcoming releases that take into account my worries above but who knows what the future holds.
I'm sorry. Is Eve the ONLY MMO that uses servers and needs maintenance? I mean I'm not sure what planet your from but all MMO's needs sometime of running income in order to stay a float. You think all these MMO's that close are free to run and they are just closing them for the heck of it? It is very expensive to run any MMO. There's server maintenance, program updates, customer service, website maintenance. I dont think a lot people on this site really realize not how much more of a production it is in developing and running an MMO compared to a single player game.
F2P MMO's still have justification for a subscription fee because of these maintenance costs. However they choose to create revenue by ads and a cash store.
So keep posting that same pic over and over again. Of course most of the costs of a service provided will and always be payroll. This is an MMO. MMO's are lways in development and MMO's always needs to be serviced. This isnt a product that you take off a shelf of a store the company that made it no longer has to do anything with it.
And this is a good reason why games that are P2P fail. No offense to you intended, but really and truly you are the reason P2P fails devs cater to you. So the rest of the MMO world burn through the little leveling content there is quickly. Then get bored and hang out in that game's version of orgrimmar being bored because the content was burnt to fast. So they go "Fuck this game ain't worth 15 bucks a month." and bail.
And the market works as it should.
If most players don't want to spend 6 month leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves.
And sub-only games failing is not a bad thing if people want to game hop and don't want a stable, every month $15 game.
How do we know most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling.
You miss the word "IF" .. the first one in the sentence.
Why would people pay a monthly subscription for Wildstar in 2013 when there's a lot of F2P or B2P mmorpgs already.
I know i won't. Why would i even pay a cent when there are so many fun f2p games? I don't even have enough time to finish all the free content.
I like how you quoted me, but deleted every single word that i myself wrote as the part that you quoted is what you yourself wrote. Here's the words you forgot to read.
Did you seriously ask that question? Are you that dense? People spend money because they find whatever they're spending that money on to be WORTH the cost. Since we're talking about mmorpgs, that worth is defined in how much enjoyment/fun will the person have.
If they feel Wildstar is going to provide them immense fun, then they're going pay a subscription for it. If a person doesn't find GW2 fun after buying it, are they going to throw their money at the cash shop even though they hate the game, or are they gonna uninstall and forget about it?
Did you seriously ask that question?
Its....not...rocket science. Trying so hard not to get banned again but you people are making it so hard.
No that's what i wrote, not what he wrote.
oh shit you're right rofl. well still, he cut everything that didn't agree with what he supported.
Originally posted by SamuraiXIV I refuse to play free to crap games. Pay to play or no play at all!!!
I refuse to play crappy game, f2p or p2p, period.
And i found many fun F2P, non-crappy, entertaining games. So i play them.
this. All the latest sub based game are F2P quality, thats why they didnt survived with a sub only model. As long as we keep receiving F2P quality mmos with a subscription-only tag, we will see more F2P rising form their ashes.
I prefer B2P and not completely Free, but sub only isnt working becuase the companies are just spending and spending on development costs and not providing the quality that actually covers the amount of money they spend. And still expect us to pay monthly.
Sure, for a while. Just make sure to throw in lifetime subs and pricy preorder boxes. Then one or two years later, go hybrid payment model and throw in some compensation cash shop tokens for the lifetime subbers.
This is how I would do it anyway. With a half decent game you would get max revenue this way. Enough easy marks in this business
By excellent support you mean a bunch of post on a forum, but the actual amount of money sub-only MMOs made DECLINED 9% in July?
would you please stop quoting something you read in a report? it doesn't reflect anything but what it says.
it does not mean sub-only mmo's are declining BECAUSE they're subscription based mmos. they would be passed over and laughed at even if they were a B2P. think GW2. almost 3 million bought the game at/near launch yet they hemmoraged a good 60-70% of that playerbase within 2 months.
The games that are going from p2p > f2p would fail just as fast if they were b2p from the start. There is only 1 requirement for a game to be successful for p2p. It has to be a good quality enriched and polished game. We haven't gotten that since WoW to be perfectly honest. Though i'm hoping FFXIV: ARR can be the first in a long time coming but we shall see.
Also as people have stated WoW has such a large percentage of the p2p mmo's audience and we know its been losing subs at a steady rate that just from WoW alone losing its subs is probably affecting that 9% decline you see. So you're basically spreading doom and gloom about a whole entire payment model based off what could very well be the results of mostly just 1 game losing subs.
And this is a good reason why games that are P2P fail. No offense to you intended, but really and truly you are the reason P2P fails devs cater to you. So the rest of the MMO world burn through the little leveling content there is quickly. Then get bored and hang out in that game's version of orgrimmar being bored because the content was burnt to fast. So they go "Fuck this game ain't worth 15 bucks a month." and bail.
And the market works as it should.
If most players don't want to spend 6 month leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves.
And sub-only games failing is not a bad thing if people want to game hop and don't want a stable, every month $15 game.
How do we know most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling.
You miss the word "IF" .. the first one in the sentence.
IF in this context means "On the assumption that".
SO "On the assumption that most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves."
Assume in this context means "to take as granted or true"
A lot of developers follow Blizzards lead. They shortened the Leveling curve because they wanted people to pay for the xpacs sooner, and experiance the end game sooner.
So Developers are "taking as granted or true" the fact that because wow shortened the Leveling curve. It must mean most people don't want to take a long time to level. When it is just because Blizzard wanted the content to be reached faster for newer players. (There is a good bit of content in WoW)
Clearly when the majority of players are burning the content getting bored and jumping. Shortening the time it takes to burn the content is not what the majority of gamers are looking for.
IF in this context means "On the assumption that".
SO "On the assumption that most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves."
Assume in this context means "to take as granted or true"
A lot of developers follow Blizzards lead. They shortened the Leveling curve because they wanted people to pay for the xpacs sooner, and experiance the end game sooner.
So Developers are "taking as granted or true" the fact that because wow shortened the Leveling curve. It must mean most people don't want to take a long time to level. When it is just because Blizzard wanted the content to be reached faster for newer players. (There is a good bit of content in WoW)
Clearly when the majority of players are burning the content getting bored and jumping. Shortening the time it takes to burn the content is not what the majority of gamers are looking for.
No. Please do not put word in my mouth.
In this case, "if" means "if". How do i know? I wrote it.
IF in this context means "On the assumption that".
SO "On the assumption that most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves."
Assume in this context means "to take as granted or true"
A lot of developers follow Blizzards lead. They shortened the Leveling curve because they wanted people to pay for the xpacs sooner, and experiance the end game sooner.
So Developers are "taking as granted or true" the fact that because wow shortened the Leveling curve. It must mean most people don't want to take a long time to level. When it is just because Blizzard wanted the content to be reached faster for newer players. (There is a good bit of content in WoW)
Clearly when the majority of players are burning the content getting bored and jumping. Shortening the time it takes to burn the content is not what the majority of gamers are looking for.
No. Please do not put word in my mouth.
In this case, "if" means "if". How do i know? I wrote it.
Please donot feed nari, he is a troll and if you keep feeding him he will post another 30 post a day to keep himself alive with attention!
O
Destiny has cheated me By forcing me to decide upon The woman that I idolise Or the hands of an automaton
Without these hands I can't complete The opera that was captivating her But if I keep them, and she marries him Then he probably won't want me dating her
IF in this context means "On the assumption that".
SO "On the assumption that most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves."
Assume in this context means "to take as granted or true"
A lot of developers follow Blizzards lead. They shortened the Leveling curve because they wanted people to pay for the xpacs sooner, and experiance the end game sooner.
So Developers are "taking as granted or true" the fact that because wow shortened the Leveling curve. It must mean most people don't want to take a long time to level. When it is just because Blizzard wanted the content to be reached faster for newer players. (There is a good bit of content in WoW)
Clearly when the majority of players are burning the content getting bored and jumping. Shortening the time it takes to burn the content is not what the majority of gamers are looking for.
No. Please do not put word in my mouth.
In this case, "if" means "if". How do i know? I wrote it.
Please donot feed nari, he is a troll and if you keep feeding him he will post another 30 post a day to keep himself alive with attention!
O
I think he is secretly pro P2P. He hurts his cause more than helps it, who is to say this is by accident?
MMO's these days are very much a different breed than the ones released in the era of Everquest, EvE, and WoW. Back in 2004 releasing a mmo with attached monthly fees was the norm, and quite a few games became wildly successful because of it (both financially and garnering the respect of customers). The MMO scene currently is a very different beast...
Before I rag on upcoming p2p mmo's, lets take a look at the currently successes. First you have WoW the grandfather of the modern mmo, and probably the last great p2p mmo as well. WoW continues to be a p2p power mainly through Blizzards groundwork laid almost 10 years ago but also because it was the first to bring the mmo genre to the masses. Another continual success for the p2p mmo's is EvE online which has achieved a continuous growth of player subs for over 10 years. CCP managed this, in my opinion, by providing the players an ever change and evolving universe that puts your sub money to good use.
Now lets take a look at what the upcoming p2p mmo wildstar has to go up against. First you have the B2P juggernaut GW2. Whether you like ANet's style of mmo's or not you have to commend them for producing a game that only requires one purchase to play. ANet has been providing content updates that have far out striped or equaled what you usually get in a P2P mmo (for your 15$) all for free.
This brings me to my main point, how can any new p2p mmo possibly come up with a reasonable and defensible answer to why they need a monthly stipend from you, in addition to the base game cost? Now I will digress for a second to say that the only P2P mmo I have encountered that made me feel as if my monthly fee was warranted, was EvE online (mainly because your monthly fee went to server architecture that actually needed maintenance and free expansions). I for one see no way a new P2P mmo can justify the need for having a large $15/month fee, unless they produce content on the scale and size of GW2's or they provide expansion style content packs for free like EvE. Long gone are the myths around needing this $15 for server upkeep and costs (http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=av26nr&s=6).
In conclusion I will be hoping for more innovative and risk taking p2p mmo's in the future, as they are my preferred style of mmo, sadly I do not see any upcoming releases that take into account my worries above but who knows what the future holds.
I'm sorry. Is Eve the ONLY MMO that uses servers and needs maintenance? I mean I'm not sure what planet your from but all MMO's needs sometime of running income in order to stay a float. You think all these MMO's that close are free to run and they are just closing them for the heck of it? It is very expensive to run any MMO. There's server maintenance, program updates, customer service, website maintenance. I dont think a lot people on this site really realize not how much more of a production it is in developing and running an MMO compared to a single player game.
F2P MMO's still have justification for a subscription fee because of these maintenance costs. However they choose to create revenue by ads and a cash store.
So keep posting that same pic over and over again. Of course most of the costs of a service provided will and always be payroll. This is an MMO. MMO's are lways in development and MMO's always needs to be serviced. This isnt a product that you take off a shelf of a store the company that made it no longer has to do anything with it.
And just remember, you get what you pay for.
Your right eve isnt the only mmo that uses servers and needs maintenance but i am willing to bet that they use alot of your monthly fee on supporting their huge single shard server and global entry points to it! I also understand that all mmo's need some kind of financial support but what I was trying to build a discussion around was if P2P was still a viable option for "new" mmo's to use in order to gain this financial stability. I also disagree with your last statement... many mmo's and games in general today that fall under the f2p or b2p business plans are quality pieces of work that deserve recognition (dota2 or gw2 are both excellent examples). I can almost say I am jaded by them because when a new mmo comes out with box price and a sub, I think to myself, why am I paying $15 a month for one new content patch a month when I see GW2 giving out the same content for free on a monthly basis! You can say GW2 isnt your game or the content isnt to your liking but you have to agree that they have trounced P2P games in constant content delivery!
The problem that I see in this thread over and over is that the general F2P market is being compared with the general F2P market. Let me ask you F2P players something. How long do you tend to spend playing each game? weeks? months? Each individual F2P game does not come anywhere near what a P2P game makes. There is no longevity in F2P games, they are throw away games. Most F2P games (not including games that once required a sub) don't last more than 6 months with a reasonable user base. The launch they get a lot of people then within 6 months server merge down to one server. They are the definition of a cash grab. The resources needed to develop a F2P game is considerably less especially since a lot of the F2P games coming to the western market are already going Asian games. The F2P developers know they only have 6 months to make money so they put their full resources into developing the cash shop and nothing into the game. The funny thing is the reason why a lot of the F2P games die out is lack of real development.
Basically we have two completely different types of games and two completely different types of gamers.
F2P gamers feel no connection with their investment of time. They have no qualm about tossing a game aside and picking up another. They have no connection with their game or the character in the game. Tend to be more solo and the community tends to not be as friendly as most of the gamers don't stick around for a long time (why make friends you wont talk to in 3 more months?)
P2P gamers feel connected to their characters. They don't want to lose the time they have spent making their characters better. They will often stick with a longer period of time with no content updates solely because they do not want to lose their character. They are in it for the long haul. (for example look at WoW and EvE, they have players who have played their games for over 8 years!). Their communities tend to be friendlier and you get tighter knit groups of people in them (After all if you invest a lot of time into your character you don't want a bad name).
Even if you look at what a successful game is you can tell that what it means to be successful in the F2P is way different than it means to be successful in the P2P genre. I think you will continue to see the current trend in a few P2P games and the rest F2P. Eventually publishers will start to run out of already running Asian F2P games and the amount of F2P being released in the west will drop. You may see an increase in quality at that point but not before.
As my preference, I have played a LOT of F2P games. I have had my fun in them to be sure but the quality is just atrocious compared to P2P games. I would rather play a good P2P then a good F2P but unfortunately we lack both currently.
F2P gamers feel no connection with their investment of time. They have no qualm about tossing a game aside and picking up another. They have no connection with their game or the character in the game. Tend to be more solo and the community tends to not be as friendly as most of the gamers don't stick around for a long time (why make friends you wont talk to in 3 more months?)
As my preference, I have played a LOT of F2P games. I have had my fun in them to be sure but the quality is just atrocious compared to P2P games. I would rather play a good P2P then a good F2P but unfortunately we lack both currently.
Absolutely. And it is great. I get to experience more variety and different gameplay.
And i don't find p2p games more fun. And hence, there is zero reason for me to pay a sub when i can get the same amount of fun for free.
In fact, some F2P games have unique IP (like STO) that you cannot even find a sub-only alternative.
BUY THIS GAME, THEN KEEP PAYING TO BE ABLE TO PLAY IT!
The MMO industry has gotten away with highway robbery for years!
I feel the same way about my phone service! And my cable service! And all the restaurants I eat at! How dare they charge me again and again! I already bought their product once!
I feel P2P games can and will survive the modern era. The thing that appeals to me about P2P is everything in the game is unlocked. No pay to unlock weapons/classes/bagslots/ etc...
The thing is with games like WOW charging 15 bucks a month you get all that content. When a new game is buggy, content lacking, and full of development short cuts (instancing zones, balance issues) but they charge the same exact amount as WoW you are not getting the same amount of content/quality for the same price.
That is what I feel keeps P2P games looking bad right now. F2P if it sucks "whatever it's free right?" P2P if it sucks "Fuck that I am not paying for some half finished beta bullshit!"
But thats just it isn't it? I can not think of a game P2P or other that wasn't "half finished" in that some aspect of the game needed more fleshing out. It seems like comparitively they all have some degree of suck at the beginning.
FFXI wasn't half finished. Tera wasn't half finished(tho it did have bugs all through launch that were around since closed beta so meh). Rift definitely wasn't half finished. I'm willing to bet money that FFXIV: ARR won't be half finished otherwise, some japanese people will need to commit seppuku.
FF11 was around before wow and held a good bit of subs (WoW raised the bar on what was excepted) Tera was unfinished there were no raids (or endgame really at all) at launch. Rift never played can't comment. Couldn't remember my log in details so missed out on the beta for ffxiv. But the first incarnation of it was broken and fail else it would not have been redone.
The point is if the value is not there neither will the subs.
Also I think what makes P2P games fail is the quick time it takes to reach endgame. If there was enough to do and it took you 6 months to reach the endgame not 6 weeks. Then there would be people paying for longer.
I agree with you on endgame although I have little interest at this point in playing a game that takes 6mo to level because for the amount of time I can commit to play that would be x10. If a game could make the journey fun instead of putting so much emphasis on end-game it could be worth it. Hell I might reconsider and play such a game if the journey was actually fun. From past P2P games I know that there are huge gaps in the journey that weren't that fun. The thought of having to stretch those out over a longer period of time makes me avoid these hard leveling grinders.
And this is a good reason why games that are P2P fail. No offense to you intended, but really and truly you are the reason P2P fails devs cater to you. So the rest of the MMO world burn through the little leveling content there is quickly. Then get bored and hang out in that game's version of orgrimmar being bored because the content was burnt to fast. So they go "Fuck this game ain't worth 15 bucks a month." and bail.
I disagree for his very next sentence is the actual reason why games that are P2P fail(in addition to making us level way to fast).
The red is the major reason why p2p mmo's of late have been failing, along with the fact that they let us players level to cap insanely fast and we consume what little content they have released because we reached max level within just days of purchase and we're done and bored.
The journey to end game isn't even long enough to be called a journey. It's just a skip really. If the leveling process is where the bulk of the funds of a game is spent to improve and 'end-game' was just a bonus for people who made it that far, then the mmorpg genre would finally be in sight of the pearly gates.
But until a dev studio realizes this, we'll have to do with shit game after shit game, with the occasional shined and polished gem but still even thoughs gems aren't worth that much, what we really want is gold but we settle for now.
No offense taken, MrPutts. I understand that folks like me have a role in what games have become. But developers would only cater to people like me because we are a big enough source of revenue to go after. It's not that I want a pure endgame only game it is that it's the path of least resistance for the developer. If you think about it if your a developer there is a big down side to making the journey more complete if your trading that off of making endgame. The journey is one-off (ignoring alts) content for the player where as endgame provides a more lasting content. If you focus on the endgame and you feel you need to appeal to players like me so you shorten the leveling curve. (I say "feel" but I'm sure there is plenty of market research for you to make a decision off of)
BUY THIS GAME, THEN KEEP PAYING TO BE ABLE TO PLAY IT!
The MMO industry has gotten away with highway robbery for years!
I feel the same way about my phone service! And my cable service! And all the restaurants I eat at! How dare they charge me again and again! I already bought their product once!
A restaurant is a bad example it's not a service. You view an MMO as a service and that is fine. I know you don't watch TV for free because that is paid for by someone else money and you wouldn't freeload like that. I bet you would never use free WiFi or at least you put a $20 in the tip jar if you do so you feel like your paying for it.
It doesn't really matter to me what payment model is used. If a game is good I'll play it. It's just that I haven't found a F2P game that I like. For me, F2P games just seem shallow money grabs, and every 2 minutes you're reminded that you can buy something. Maybe it's just me, but F2P games seem to be more focused on Hats, pets, OP gear, and whatever cosmetic stuff they can think up and create, instead of focusing on Content, Story, and Fun, which are my big 3 for if a game is good or not.
Edit: GW2 is the only F2P that actually puts out good content, story, but I can't stand the combat and lack of trinity. Also,I consider B2P the same thing as F2P, since F2P isn't free if you really want to play it in the long run.
I feel the same way about my phone service! And my cable service! And all the restaurants I eat at! How dare they charge me again and again! I already bought their product once!
Because you have no choice, unlike in MMOs.
In MMOs, there are plenty of free fun alternatives. So no, i can't find a free phone service, but i can find a good free MMO. Hence, i am paying for my phone service, but not for MMOs.
It doesn't really matter to me what payment model is used. If a game is good I'll play it. It's just that I haven't found a F2P game that I like. For me, F2P games just seem shallow money grabs, and every 2 minutes you're reminded that you can buy something. Maybe it's just me, but F2P games seem to be more focused on Hats, pets, OP gear, and whatever cosmetic stuff they can think up and create, instead of focusing on Content, Story, and Fun, which are my big 3 for if a game is good or not.
Edit: GW2 is the only F2P that actually puts out good content, story, but I can't stand the combat and lack of trinity. Also,I consider B2P the same thing as F2P, since F2P isn't free if you really want to play it in the long run.
Once again B2P is not F2P, if you have to pay for a "box" how can it be called a F2P title? It is the funding buying the box brings that gives you a better product.
Comments
Cool, I understand your post better now. Thanks for explaining that.
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
How do we know most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling. Name the last game that had 6 months leveling? For that matter name the last game that failed because it took to long to reach max level. I know Vanilla Wow had a long leveling curve. It took longer to get from 1-60 than it does to get to 1-90 now and I would bet 1-90 in wow quit play a different game and get to max level in that one.
If people are getting to max level quickly and then bitch there is nothing to do so they bail. That leads me to believe they want more game to play. If they had that "extra" game being the time it takes to get to that max level then they might not complain as much about not having things to do.
Game hoping comes from boredom. Boredom comes from lack of game to play. Lack of game to play comes from chewing up what is available extremely quickly.
Slow it down see what happens.
Edit for fail type
Ea is like a poo fingered midas ~ShakyMo
As I mentioned I had become fed up, so much to the point that I sold all of my pc equipment. Now with ESO and Wildstar taking the high road, I can see a future in the pc gaming world again.
P2p for the sake of gaming please, when I look at what mmorpg titles are available, the first thing I do is look at the pay model. The second thing I do is disregard all f2p games as a playable option.
No that's what i wrote, not what he wrote.
I'm sorry. Is Eve the ONLY MMO that uses servers and needs maintenance? I mean I'm not sure what planet your from but all MMO's needs sometime of running income in order to stay a float. You think all these MMO's that close are free to run and they are just closing them for the heck of it? It is very expensive to run any MMO. There's server maintenance, program updates, customer service, website maintenance. I dont think a lot people on this site really realize not how much more of a production it is in developing and running an MMO compared to a single player game.
F2P MMO's still have justification for a subscription fee because of these maintenance costs. However they choose to create revenue by ads and a cash store.
So keep posting that same pic over and over again. Of course most of the costs of a service provided will and always be payroll. This is an MMO. MMO's are lways in development and MMO's always needs to be serviced. This isnt a product that you take off a shelf of a store the company that made it no longer has to do anything with it.
And just remember, you get what you pay for.
You miss the word "IF" .. the first one in the sentence.
By excellent support you mean a bunch of post on a forum, but the actual amount of money sub-only MMOs made DECLINED 9% in July?
oh shit you're right rofl. well still, he cut everything that didn't agree with what he supported.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
this. All the latest sub based game are F2P quality, thats why they didnt survived with a sub only model. As long as we keep receiving F2P quality mmos with a subscription-only tag, we will see more F2P rising form their ashes.
I prefer B2P and not completely Free, but sub only isnt working becuase the companies are just spending and spending on development costs and not providing the quality that actually covers the amount of money they spend. And still expect us to pay monthly.
"Can P2P survive in the modern mmorpg genre?"
Sure, for a while. Just make sure to throw in lifetime subs and pricy preorder boxes. Then one or two years later, go hybrid payment model and throw in some compensation cash shop tokens for the lifetime subbers.
This is how I would do it anyway. With a half decent game you would get max revenue this way. Enough easy marks in this business
would you please stop quoting something you read in a report? it doesn't reflect anything but what it says.
it does not mean sub-only mmo's are declining BECAUSE they're subscription based mmos. they would be passed over and laughed at even if they were a B2P. think GW2. almost 3 million bought the game at/near launch yet they hemmoraged a good 60-70% of that playerbase within 2 months.
The games that are going from p2p > f2p would fail just as fast if they were b2p from the start. There is only 1 requirement for a game to be successful for p2p. It has to be a good quality enriched and polished game. We haven't gotten that since WoW to be perfectly honest. Though i'm hoping FFXIV: ARR can be the first in a long time coming but we shall see.
Also as people have stated WoW has such a large percentage of the p2p mmo's audience and we know its been losing subs at a steady rate that just from WoW alone losing its subs is probably affecting that 9% decline you see. So you're basically spreading doom and gloom about a whole entire payment model based off what could very well be the results of mostly just 1 game losing subs.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
IF in this context means "On the assumption that".
SO "On the assumption that most players don't want to spend 6 months leveling, the market should produce games with shorter leveling curves."
Assume in this context means "to take as granted or true"
A lot of developers follow Blizzards lead. They shortened the Leveling curve because they wanted people to pay for the xpacs sooner, and experiance the end game sooner.
So Developers are "taking as granted or true" the fact that because wow shortened the Leveling curve. It must mean most people don't want to take a long time to level. When it is just because Blizzard wanted the content to be reached faster for newer players. (There is a good bit of content in WoW)
Clearly when the majority of players are burning the content getting bored and jumping. Shortening the time it takes to burn the content is not what the majority of gamers are looking for.
Ea is like a poo fingered midas ~ShakyMo
No. Please do not put word in my mouth.
In this case, "if" means "if". How do i know? I wrote it.
Please donot feed nari, he is a troll and if you keep feeding him he will post another 30 post a day to keep himself alive with attention!
O
Destiny has cheated me
By forcing me to decide upon
The woman that I idolise
Or the hands of an automaton
Without these hands I can't complete
The opera that was captivating her
But if I keep them, and she marries him
Then he probably won't want me dating her
I think he is secretly pro P2P. He hurts his cause more than helps it, who is to say this is by accident?
Your right eve isnt the only mmo that uses servers and needs maintenance but i am willing to bet that they use alot of your monthly fee on supporting their huge single shard server and global entry points to it! I also understand that all mmo's need some kind of financial support but what I was trying to build a discussion around was if P2P was still a viable option for "new" mmo's to use in order to gain this financial stability. I also disagree with your last statement... many mmo's and games in general today that fall under the f2p or b2p business plans are quality pieces of work that deserve recognition (dota2 or gw2 are both excellent examples). I can almost say I am jaded by them because when a new mmo comes out with box price and a sub, I think to myself, why am I paying $15 a month for one new content patch a month when I see GW2 giving out the same content for free on a monthly basis! You can say GW2 isnt your game or the content isnt to your liking but you have to agree that they have trounced P2P games in constant content delivery!
To answer the OP yes P2P will survive.
The problem that I see in this thread over and over is that the general F2P market is being compared with the general F2P market. Let me ask you F2P players something. How long do you tend to spend playing each game? weeks? months? Each individual F2P game does not come anywhere near what a P2P game makes. There is no longevity in F2P games, they are throw away games. Most F2P games (not including games that once required a sub) don't last more than 6 months with a reasonable user base. The launch they get a lot of people then within 6 months server merge down to one server. They are the definition of a cash grab. The resources needed to develop a F2P game is considerably less especially since a lot of the F2P games coming to the western market are already going Asian games. The F2P developers know they only have 6 months to make money so they put their full resources into developing the cash shop and nothing into the game. The funny thing is the reason why a lot of the F2P games die out is lack of real development.
Basically we have two completely different types of games and two completely different types of gamers.
F2P gamers feel no connection with their investment of time. They have no qualm about tossing a game aside and picking up another. They have no connection with their game or the character in the game. Tend to be more solo and the community tends to not be as friendly as most of the gamers don't stick around for a long time (why make friends you wont talk to in 3 more months?)
P2P gamers feel connected to their characters. They don't want to lose the time they have spent making their characters better. They will often stick with a longer period of time with no content updates solely because they do not want to lose their character. They are in it for the long haul. (for example look at WoW and EvE, they have players who have played their games for over 8 years!). Their communities tend to be friendlier and you get tighter knit groups of people in them (After all if you invest a lot of time into your character you don't want a bad name).
Even if you look at what a successful game is you can tell that what it means to be successful in the F2P is way different than it means to be successful in the P2P genre. I think you will continue to see the current trend in a few P2P games and the rest F2P. Eventually publishers will start to run out of already running Asian F2P games and the amount of F2P being released in the west will drop. You may see an increase in quality at that point but not before.
As my preference, I have played a LOT of F2P games. I have had my fun in them to be sure but the quality is just atrocious compared to P2P games. I would rather play a good P2P then a good F2P but unfortunately we lack both currently.
Absolutely. And it is great. I get to experience more variety and different gameplay.
And i don't find p2p games more fun. And hence, there is zero reason for me to pay a sub when i can get the same amount of fun for free.
In fact, some F2P games have unique IP (like STO) that you cannot even find a sub-only alternative.
I feel the same way about my phone service! And my cable service! And all the restaurants I eat at! How dare they charge me again and again! I already bought their product once!
No offense taken, MrPutts. I understand that folks like me have a role in what games have become. But developers would only cater to people like me because we are a big enough source of revenue to go after. It's not that I want a pure endgame only game it is that it's the path of least resistance for the developer. If you think about it if your a developer there is a big down side to making the journey more complete if your trading that off of making endgame. The journey is one-off (ignoring alts) content for the player where as endgame provides a more lasting content. If you focus on the endgame and you feel you need to appeal to players like me so you shorten the leveling curve. (I say "feel" but I'm sure there is plenty of market research for you to make a decision off of)
A restaurant is a bad example it's not a service. You view an MMO as a service and that is fine. I know you don't watch TV for free because that is paid for by someone else money and you wouldn't freeload like that. I bet you would never use free WiFi or at least you put a $20 in the tip jar if you do so you feel like your paying for it.
It doesn't really matter to me what payment model is used. If a game is good I'll play it. It's just that I haven't found a F2P game that I like. For me, F2P games just seem shallow money grabs, and every 2 minutes you're reminded that you can buy something. Maybe it's just me, but F2P games seem to be more focused on Hats, pets, OP gear, and whatever cosmetic stuff they can think up and create, instead of focusing on Content, Story, and Fun, which are my big 3 for if a game is good or not.
Edit: GW2 is the only F2P that actually puts out good content, story, but I can't stand the combat and lack of trinity. Also,I consider B2P the same thing as F2P, since F2P isn't free if you really want to play it in the long run.
Because you have no choice, unlike in MMOs.
In MMOs, there are plenty of free fun alternatives. So no, i can't find a free phone service, but i can find a good free MMO. Hence, i am paying for my phone service, but not for MMOs.
Very logical.
It is all about competition and alternatives.
Once again B2P is not F2P, if you have to pay for a "box" how can it be called a F2P title? It is the funding buying the box brings that gives you a better product.
Only the games that are worth a sub can survive all the other trash goes free to play.
Realy simple answer realy.