I play a few mmo's and whichever one I am currently playing full time, I prefer to sub.
Most people I meet (not all) that are playing a particular MMO as their main one, seem to sub regardless of a F2P option as usually the F2P option hinders game play too much.
At the same time, most of those I know that do sub, are also happy to spend more money on mtx from time to time.
Of course they sub due to the extra benefits and if a company becomes too greedy, there may come a point where it's not really worth subbing any more.
Sure something like Candy Crush will make more in a couple of days than most MMOs make in a month, but we need to look further into why companies are writing games. Sure they want to make a profit, but usually they also have a passion for their games too.
Lotro is a good example in my opinion of how not to do it from the players point of view.
I subbed, I was happy subbing. Turbine went F2P. At the time I was gullible enough to believe the hype, I thought it might be good for the game, extra money to invest in more regular content etc.
But what we were told and what we ended up with are two completely different things. The regular content didn't materialise, the game got dumbed down more and more to appeal to those that wanted a more facebook style faceroll game and a LOT (not all) of the long time players now find the game zero fun.
The store is completely in our faces, some of the prices are extortionate and we can only get the said items from the store, such as the extra housing vault space.
But my main complaint is that rather than concentrating on Lord Of The Rings and producing a very good game, with MTX used as a way of making extra money, implemented in a way that doesn't interfere with the game play too much, they have seen the cash cow MTX can be, and have simply made that their top priority with the actual game being an after thought.
It seems the bean counters at Turbine have got very very greedy and seem to be after short term gains at the expense of a good game and long term players.
For me, F2P has ended up killing Lotro due to one thing and one thing only, the greed of Turbines bean counters.
Lotro has now become pointless to sub to in my opinion as so much still needs to be bought additionally.
I don't mind F2P if it's done in a way that allows those that want to sub to have nothing to do with it, (or not in their faces all the time) and prices for things like vault space either free for subscribers (and subscribers getting zero store cash) or subscribers getting store cash each month and the prices of vault space etc not requiring more real world money.
I suppose I would liken F2P done badly to a company producing a quality product, say hand crafted oak furniture, and new bosses coming in and they realising they can make more profit if they mass produce the furniture by using MDF covered with a oak laminate instead. Initially they will make a big profit, but word would soon get around about the quality and their reputation will be severely (if not irreversibly) damaged.
A game like ESO is of course designed to make a profit, but (hopefully) not designed to make the quickest maximum profit possible at the expense of a very good game. If they don't get the return they need, I hope if they have to go the MTX route, they can do so in a way that keeps the players happy.
ps: do the figures for Lotros subscribers in the made up chart include lifetimers, if so those sub guesses are vastly off as many lifetimers I know including myself, haven't given Turbine a penny in months and don't intend to unless they seriously change their ways.
I agree with the author that the mixed sub and mtx revenue streams are the most profitable but do so only from personal experience. I originally subbed SWTOR and then quit. I came back a year later as f2p. I quickly saw that a sub would give me a huge load of benefits and re-subbed. But rather than just pay the sub bought the armor upgrades (level 10 and 40 I think) using real money for the second purchase.
WOW went the same way for me. I re-subbed and then bought a flying mount.
I have tried TSW, RIFT (f2p), STO and GW2 and never paid a dime (except the GW2 initial purchase).
Thus, from my experience, I can see where the sub plus mtx is the biggest revenue generator.
I also agree with the posters above that say that it is the game, more than the price, that determines the fate of an MMO.
Originally posted by jdnyc Originally posted by TorvaldrOriginally posted by ComafOriginally posted by NephelaiNone of this matters. If a gaming company produces a quality game with great service people will pay a fair value under any model to be entertained by it. All this reverse engineering trying to predict a games success based on its payment system after we know the results of other games is arse backwards. Games go B2P or F2P because they either don't have confidence in their product/service to command a sub (or even a higher price) or they are facing financial ruin.
Yes! Thank you. No. It's not. For some people that may be true, but for a lot of others it is not. All of these upcoming games are probably going to be great, but I'm not paying a subscription for them. I just don't play sub-locked games. Now when, and if, they convert to sub-free and they have promo then I might buy in before conversion to reap the benefits, but that's about it.And you wouldn't be as important to them. They want the people that will pay a sub AND mtx. Apparently there's enough of those people that they can ignore the freeloaders until later where they get those peeps as additional revenue source. But that's not the primary focus of earnings. That's where the most F2P proponents get it wrong.
This is actually not true. If a business focuses solely on sub+mtx to the exclusion of people who only want subs or who only want mtx, they lose a significant portion of their revenue stream. The only way to maximize their revenue and maximize the amount of profit they can possibly make is to have offering for all three groups of paying players, and offerings for people who aren't going to pay at all.
Think of it like this. It's better to make a profit of a million dollars with ten million dollars total sales than to make a profit of ten thousand dollars with twenty thousand dollars worth of sales.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Bad business model: Sub hurts initial sales. Most only play a few months and when they return they have paid nothing for new content released since they left. The list of failed sub based games is very, very long. WoW launched in a different age; it to suffers from churn but the cycle is old and, whilst declining, is "established" .
Better business model: e.g. EA's premium membership. Customer purchases game; customer can play core game. Initial box sales not damaged. New content via paid DLC not by sub. Online service fee option to cover e.g. a year. (Initial year could be included, depends on core game needs). Small charge however so as not to damage box sales. Premium membership option: X content drops in e.g. a year plus online. May sound like a sub but - crucially - all content has to be paid for.
The first sub based games did not include content as part of the sub. The sub covered network costs. Think EQ1 expansions. Providing content with the sub came about when people started to grumble that network costs were falling but the sub cost didn't. And GW1 showed that network costs are very small indeed today.
So it is all about people paying for new content. And paid DLC is a much better option for this.
Zenimax have stated that TESO includes a core solo game. They have stated that their is lots new content coming. So this should be an easy option.
If the real reason is that the game has cost them so much that the box price should be e.g. $300 then they should charge $300. Or split out the core game out and sell expansion areas. Messy for a group - sure but that happens whenever you have expansions in a game. And better than telling people the sub is to cover new content when its really to cover the cost of old content. False expectations; recipe for disaster. And your initial sales will have suffered as well.
I was going to quote the diatribe nonsense above on Lotro, but it is far too wordy to bother filling up the page. Basically I have subbed twice, once each on two accounts. I found an old beta account so I play both. I probably invested another $40 and now have two accounts with multiple max level characters. Please explain to me how the item shop is expensive because I find the game generates plenty of store points to buy just about anything. I also do not understand why you think the game is dumbed down, it isn't at all from my perspective. I really like the changes to character skills with the last expansion, I can actually get all my skills on the screen now. I will probably continue to sub with Lotro as I am enjoying the game right now, it has far more depth than Wow atm.
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Let's be fair. One tv series, not one movie.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Your analogy falls flat on it's face. Just take Eve for example, it could take you a year to visit all it's systems, Lotro is another example of lots of content. I do not grasp your point of view, but for many of us, subscriptions is a cheap way to enjoy a game. Most of these strictly f2p games are merely a money grabs, give me a subscription game any day in the week. At least I get access to all the content. I am still waiting for someone to come up with even a half baked reason why subscriptions won't work. No one in this thread has come even close.
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Hes Netflix example is not flawed at all , your example however is exaggerated to say the least. One Movie..that lasts 2-3 years then ? and one that is constantly updated with diffrent story choices starts and endings sometimes even based on your own choices, (Cool now that I Think about it) but not very doable .
If you pay for a subscription to an MMO you pay for a MMO not a singleplayer game that will last you 2-15 Hours, you pay it because you feel that "maybe" this game will give you Entertainment for months or even years to come. Also if you play such a game you will NOT have time for other games because all you spare time will go to Guild activity etc etc
If It doesn't do that you will ofcouse end your subsription Before the standard MONTH included in the purchase. A Month that most likely will be more than enough to validate your choice in this.
"As of June 2013, Skyrim has doubled that tally with over 20 million units sold, according toBethesda's official blog. "
Makes you wonder how irate the single-player team must be to see how much money Zenimax is spending on Elder Scrolls Online as opposed to immediately producing a Skyrim sequel.
I do not like him in the future, that separate pay one market too it will be beside a subscription. Why not more unique armor could be skin for me? Burns otherwise lame it armor's his structure and his appearance according to me.
I don't think it's accurate to refer to a game that has gone from subscription to F2P as "failed" anymore. That experiment is over and the results are in.
LOTRO is a perfect example.
If I were launching a new MMO today I would use the subscription model and higher box prices to launch so I could maximize initial ROI. After the game stabilized I would drop the purchase price to get new players and introduce MTX to retain existing subscribers. Only after I saw sub numbers dropping consistently would I transition to a Rift-type system where you can F2P or sub and participate in an increasing number of MTX transactions.
LOTRO and Rift are both proving the model can work and both still enjoy healthy pops that pay enough to more than keep the lights on.
We know from NCSoft's most recent numbers that GW2 produces about $8.25Million per month in revenue via their business model. These numbers, imo, are greatly under-performing the game's original potential due to the horrible change of direction the game took in 2013 with the "Living Story" concept of "adventure by checklist", junk food content development. If not for the mis-step, the game could have raked in $10-12Million monthly with the B2P model.
Subscriptions are only "dependable revenue" as long as people continue to subscribe. Subscriptions work for games like WoW because they have an established base of habitual players. For contemporary new releases, the subscription model forces potential players to decide after a month or two if the at release game is really good enough to justify an ongoing commitment. With so much competition, most of it now supporting MT, rather than subscription models, a large percentage of initial players that might have stuck around otherwise and even supported the game via a cash shop make the break and never look back.
Once a sub MMO loses a player and their subscription, there is very little likelihood they will ever get those players back. Well, until the sub model fails within 8-16 months and the game goes F2P anyway.
F2P and B2P games have the huge advantage in that players can easily come and go with out having to make a clean break. Cool new content, finding a RL friend plays the game, or just an itch to play after a break can all bring F2P/B2P gamers back into the game and potentially back into the revenue stream.
Pretty much every sub based AAA MMO released since WoW has been forced to transition to a F2P or hybrid model. The average time between launch and the transition has also been growing shorter and shorter. Most of these games are doing much better with the cash shop model than they did at the 6 month mark of subscription revenue. Imagine how much more successful many of these games would be today if they hadn't permanently lost a majority of their original launch hype customers due to the "subscription clear break" from the title.
Knowing that almost all sub based MMOs do transition to a F2P business model, often fairly quickly, how can many subscribers not feel ripped off by a somewhat cynical cash grab?
It's wrong to say that GuildWars 2 is generating $8.5 million from MTX monthly. Their Q3 financial report (most recent on their website) says they generated 24,481 million Korean Won from GuildWars2. Using Google to do the FOREX conversion that works out to $23 million, or $7.6 million per month for Q3. However, that's not MTX. That's some mix of MTX AND game sales.
NC Soft provides no guidance on how to split that revenue. However, since the Q3 revenue is comparable to the Q1 and Q2 numbers we should assume that a very large portion is game sales. Conservatively I'd say at least 66%, and maybe more.
Your point #2 is just wrong. Any subscription-based business knows that re-engagement with lapsed subscribers is a key source of revenue. Many players drift in and out of subscriber status over their lifetime engagement with the game. The percentage who can be re-engaged varies from game to game but it's very high.
In my opinion, your point #5 is wrong too. They lost those players because they were AAA Themepark WoW clones, and once players had burned through the content available at launch, they were going to leave no matter what the monetization model is or was. Maximizing the revenue from those people during the first 6 months of the game's life is the only smart thing to do when you know that you're going to lose 90% of them anyway.
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Your analogy falls flat on it's face. Just take Eve for example, it could take you a year to visit all it's systems, Lotro is another example of lots of content. I do not grasp your point of view, but for many of us, subscriptions is a cheap way to enjoy a game. Most of these strictly f2p games are merely a money grabs, give me a subscription game any day in the week. At least I get access to all the content. I am still waiting for someone to come up with even a half baked reason why subscriptions won't work. No one in this thread has come even close.
SWTOR, RIFT, TERA, AION, TSW.....should I go on?
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I was reading the wikipedia page on Clash of Clans the other day and it was talking about the companies 2 games making them $2.4 million a day. Small game, lots of fun and not really an end in sight nor something people walk away from. Can every game pull this off, not really. I pay for WoW but usually leave after a few months. Been like this for years. I have recently started up subs for both AoC and TSW, mostly because they offer a cool veteran program. However, I use the MTX in both too. I like having both options available as I feel less restricted. If I cant pay for one for some reason I can still play at least and buy the couple things i need. I personally think that once WoW joins with the rest of the MMO gaming world as far as MTX stuff we will see much less of these debates over whether of not it works. Hell as it is WoW offers vanilla for free. I have come to the point in my gaming that a game has to really draw my attention to be willing to pay the up front $$. There have been games where I tried the beta and as soon as it launch i was at the store. There were others that i never played and just followed the development and at launch was at the store. With the market so flooded with MMOs I believe its getting harder for companies to pull people in to those initial $60 price tags. This is made worse by all the games coming out of Asia that are free out the gate, and are good games to boot.
I am a big supporter of the hybrid model. I often will do a sub and MTX particularly if the company offers great stuff in the MTX shop (AoC and TSW are my favorites). I like not feeling restricted to a sub if it doesnt for for me at that moment. Does WoW get my non-use sub money for a couple months, sure. However, I soon cancel and then am gone for upwards of 6 months. If they did MTX too I would likely stay and still buy some stuff. I am sure there are loads of people who feel this way too...
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Hes Netflix example is not flawed at all , your example however is exaggerated to say the least. One Movie..that lasts 2-3 years then ? and one that is constantly updated with diffrent story choices starts and endings sometimes even based on your own choices, (Cool now that I Think about it) but not very doable .
If you pay for a subscription to an MMO you pay for a MMO not a singleplayer game that will last you 2-15 Hours, you pay it because you feel that "maybe" this game will give you Entertainment for months or even years to come. Also if you play such a game you will NOT have time for other games because all you spare time will go to Guild activity etc etc
If It doesn't do that you will ofcouse end your subsription Before the standard MONTH included in the purchase. A Month that most likely will be more than enough to validate your choice in this.
Skyrim is a single player game are you really going to try and defend there is only 2 - 15 hours in that game? Some people have thousands of hours in Elder Scroll games and they're all single player. Some people have hundreds or thousands of hours in many single player games, especially those with mods. I paid $20 for one TL2 copy and $5 to add it to Steam. I have tons of hours in that game and it's no mmo.
I don't see the argument in playing just one game. I've done that before and it wasn't worth it.
Sorry, but ok. I forgot to mention in my perfectly valid example that there naturally are games in singleplayer that some players play very long aswell..
Yeah there are singleplayer games that are breaking the mold with long gameplay even in singleplayer, games that you can play for VERY LONG with yourself.
You have a thing for stretching for valid Points I see, even the Skyrim example you gave here to disvalidate my Point doesn't cut it, because there is naturally Always diffrent things that breaks the mold, besides as mentioned Skyrim is a singleplayer game that get's to live long based on it's moddable Community and frequent DLC's or expansions packs, those expansions goes for 20-30 $ each right ? 60 Dollars for the base game + 20*4 . When counting it like this you wil end up with a singlplayer game that you have payd almost as much to as an MMO..Í'd say almost because you can ofcourse release expansions to an MMO aswell and that will make it more expensive , It is a more expensive gametype, COSTs more to develop, to maintain . The only thing Skyrim needs is maybe a bugfix , the rest is maintained by the Community for diffrent needs.
And lastly , I personally would never play a game like Skyrim for that long, I played it maybe max 30 Hours or so, after that I feel that it get's boring. I played the main story ...and gave it up..:) I didnt even Think it was such a great game.
The argument with just one game regarding MMO's is that IF you are serious about it, joining a Guild, starting some raidactivities and all that, you won't have much time left for ANY other games, unless ofcourse you do not have a job or are home 24/7 for any other reason
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
It's not directly comparable. Your Netflix analogy would work if you said you subscribe to one movie. That's what subbing to an mmo is like, subscribing to the same movie. Now if you subscribed to an mmo publisher with 2 million games for $8 a month then that analogy would make sense to me.
The sub-locked model for gaming is becoming increasingly outdated. Context matters. I'm sure that is likely lost on the mouth frothers though.
Your analogy falls flat on it's face. Just take Eve for example, it could take you a year to visit all it's systems, Lotro is another example of lots of content. I do not grasp your point of view, but for many of us, subscriptions is a cheap way to enjoy a game. Most of these strictly f2p games are merely a money grabs, give me a subscription game any day in the week. At least I get access to all the content. I am still waiting for someone to come up with even a half baked reason why subscriptions won't work. No one in this thread has come even close.
SWTOR, RIFT, TERA, AION, TSW.....should I go on?
These games has gone F2P , but the reasons doesn't have anything to do with it's payment model, they where is some form or Another a dissapointment to the players, If they give you a long lasting very good MMO, people will pay it's subscription fee. Most of the above games are rather good, but by the time the free month is over , so is also the urge to play , so why pay a subscrition then when the game is over for most players. They need to build a game with strong Community features that will last very long from the get go, haven't seen such a game in a very long time.
It will be the biggest failure of 2014 because the only reason to play ESO over any other game on the market, besides games like The Repopulation and ArchAge, is because you like the Elder Scrolls Universe.
I always find it weird when people talk about subscription number plummeting. Actually, I find that complete and total garbage.
WoW has been losing numbers because it is over ten years old, its entire system is dated, and there are new things out there. That's what happens over time, and its why newspapers are going the way of the dodo bird. Because new and better things have come along. It has nothing at all to do with the game being subscriber based.
Lord of the Rings went to an MTX model when their numbers were crashing and burning so fast they had no other choice. They were taking way too long between expansions and the expansions were focusing solely on a single element of the game (such as focusing ONLY on pvp).
The success of MTX vs subscription is rather hard to figure out. The reason being that nearly all games that offer MTX also offer subscription. Without the game companies releasing the numbers you will NEVER know how many of those players are subscription and how many aren't.
There's also the simple fact that MTX does allow more people to play. But does that mean they are quality players or does that mean they are horrible people who make it their mission to make other players miserable? Generally, what I have seen is that the subscription model keeps these types of players from playing the game and gives more of a community feeling than the other model. And, after all, this is an MMO which is supposed to mean community, not ganking and harassing other players.
An MTX model gives much less of a feeling of connection to the game than a subscriber model does. If someone is paying monthly, they actually WANT the game to succeed because they want to get their moneys worth. The MTX model means that a player doesn't have to pay anything if they don't want to and has no connection to the game so they harass others. Hybrids are a little better, but the MTX players tend to ruin it for the subscribers. In many games, I've found myself shutting down the chats (which defeats the purpose of the MMO) just so I don't have to heardthe mouthing off that's coming from the mostly MTX players.
Does the MTX format make money? Yes it does. Does the subscriber format make money? Yes it does. But not everything is about money.
As for the games that have been released, there are new games out there that are going to change the way the MMORPG genre works provided they do what they say they're going to do. And all of the current major development companies are going to be thrown for a loop when they do. They will suddenly find a mass emigration of the current standards to the new, TRUE Next Generation games that will likely be released within the next 5 years or so. Games that have stopped getting big budget publishers to fund them early on in the process and started asking for players help.
You just wait and see.... The current model is going by the wayside. You can flow with the tide, or you will get washed away. Subscription, MTX, or hybrid, players want more than anything that's currently being offered.
Just want to point out this chart is wrong the green is people who want to pay less than the subscription and the purple people who pay more, you can see this from your other chart take Wizard101.
Out of 20,000,000 players only 1,000,000 are subscribers most people who pay more then the subscription fee "also" pay the subscription fee to get those benefits meaning the ones who pay more are less then 1,000,000.
The way the chat is the more it costs the more people want to pay it at a rate approaching infinity which is silly lol the number of people who pay less is much greater then the number who pay more then the subscription fee.
First lets take a look at the guy posting this article.
Hes a guy that started a kickstarer for Pathfinders, he has an invested interest in boosting subscriptions because that is what will be funding HIS game.
He is also pretty terrible at predicting anything RPG related. This article I found has some interesting information about him. He likes to claim the RPG genre is constantly on the donwfall when ever something he does fails.
From his claims in the past it seems he really isn't a very credible expert when it comes to market trends even when he is an 'insider.'
I also don't think many are taking into account that the IP used was (before ESO) a single player IP. There is going to be some heavy refunding from console sales if at stores selling the console version there is not a huge warning sign posted that the game requires a monthly subscription to continue playing. The reason for this is because it is the first in its series to require anything other than a computer or console. None of the version before even required an internet connection, now this new installment will require a permanent online connection as well as a subscription.
Many of us that post on here I think lose perspective of what its like to not be an invested gamer. We all spend a lot of time in game, or researching games and not as many do this. So besides the payment model being an issue for many, its the console side release that is going to be a huge issue as well. The potential faults of this game are not just on one platform but many, and as such it increases the number of variables that can go wrong.
Comments
I play a few mmo's and whichever one I am currently playing full time, I prefer to sub.
Most people I meet (not all) that are playing a particular MMO as their main one, seem to sub regardless of a F2P option as usually the F2P option hinders game play too much.At the same time, most of those I know that do sub, are also happy to spend more money on mtx from time to time.
Of course they sub due to the extra benefits and if a company becomes too greedy, there may come a point where it's not really worth subbing any more.
Sure something like Candy Crush will make more in a couple of days than most MMOs make in a month, but we need to look further into why companies are writing games. Sure they want to make a profit, but usually they also have a passion for their games too.
Lotro is a good example in my opinion of how not to do it from the players point of view.
I subbed, I was happy subbing. Turbine went F2P. At the time I was gullible enough to believe the hype, I thought it might be good for the game, extra money to invest in more regular content etc.
But what we were told and what we ended up with are two completely different things. The regular content didn't materialise, the game got dumbed down more and more to appeal to those that wanted a more facebook style faceroll game and a LOT (not all) of the long time players now find the game zero fun.
The store is completely in our faces, some of the prices are extortionate and we can only get the said items from the store, such as the extra housing vault space.
But my main complaint is that rather than concentrating on Lord Of The Rings and producing a very good game, with MTX used as a way of making extra money, implemented in a way that doesn't interfere with the game play too much, they have seen the cash cow MTX can be, and have simply made that their top priority with the actual game being an after thought.
It seems the bean counters at Turbine have got very very greedy and seem to be after short term gains at the expense of a good game and long term players.
For me, F2P has ended up killing Lotro due to one thing and one thing only, the greed of Turbines bean counters.
Lotro has now become pointless to sub to in my opinion as so much still needs to be bought additionally.
I don't mind F2P if it's done in a way that allows those that want to sub to have nothing to do with it, (or not in their faces all the time) and prices for things like vault space either free for subscribers (and subscribers getting zero store cash) or subscribers getting store cash each month and the prices of vault space etc not requiring more real world money.
I suppose I would liken F2P done badly to a company producing a quality product, say hand crafted oak furniture, and new bosses coming in and they realising they can make more profit if they mass produce the furniture by using MDF covered with a oak laminate instead. Initially they will make a big profit, but word would soon get around about the quality and their reputation will be severely (if not irreversibly) damaged.
A game like ESO is of course designed to make a profit, but (hopefully) not designed to make the quickest maximum profit possible at the expense of a very good game. If they don't get the return they need, I hope if they have to go the MTX route, they can do so in a way that keeps the players happy.
ps: do the figures for Lotros subscribers in the made up chart include lifetimers, if so those sub guesses are vastly off as many lifetimers I know including myself, haven't given Turbine a penny in months and don't intend to unless they seriously change their ways.
I agree with the author that the mixed sub and mtx revenue streams are the most profitable but do so only from personal experience. I originally subbed SWTOR and then quit. I came back a year later as f2p. I quickly saw that a sub would give me a huge load of benefits and re-subbed. But rather than just pay the sub bought the armor upgrades (level 10 and 40 I think) using real money for the second purchase.
WOW went the same way for me. I re-subbed and then bought a flying mount.
I have tried TSW, RIFT (f2p), STO and GW2 and never paid a dime (except the GW2 initial purchase).
Thus, from my experience, I can see where the sub plus mtx is the biggest revenue generator.
I also agree with the posters above that say that it is the game, more than the price, that determines the fate of an MMO.
No. It's not. For some people that may be true, but for a lot of others it is not. All of these upcoming games are probably going to be great, but I'm not paying a subscription for them. I just don't play sub-locked games. Now when, and if, they convert to sub-free and they have promo then I might buy in before conversion to reap the benefits, but that's about it.
And you wouldn't be as important to them. They want the people that will pay a sub AND mtx. Apparently there's enough of those people that they can ignore the freeloaders until later where they get those peeps as additional revenue source. But that's not the primary focus of earnings. That's where the most F2P proponents get it wrong.
This is actually not true. If a business focuses solely on sub+mtx to the exclusion of people who only want subs or who only want mtx, they lose a significant portion of their revenue stream. The only way to maximize their revenue and maximize the amount of profit they can possibly make is to have offering for all three groups of paying players, and offerings for people who aren't going to pay at all.
Think of it like this. It's better to make a profit of a million dollars with ten million dollars total sales than to make a profit of ten thousand dollars with twenty thousand dollars worth of sales.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Bad business model: Sub hurts initial sales. Most only play a few months and when they return they have paid nothing for new content released since they left. The list of failed sub based games is very, very long. WoW launched in a different age; it to suffers from churn but the cycle is old and, whilst declining, is "established" .
Better business model: e.g. EA's premium membership. Customer purchases game; customer can play core game. Initial box sales not damaged. New content via paid DLC not by sub. Online service fee option to cover e.g. a year. (Initial year could be included, depends on core game needs). Small charge however so as not to damage box sales. Premium membership option: X content drops in e.g. a year plus online. May sound like a sub but - crucially - all content has to be paid for.
The first sub based games did not include content as part of the sub. The sub covered network costs. Think EQ1 expansions. Providing content with the sub came about when people started to grumble that network costs were falling but the sub cost didn't. And GW1 showed that network costs are very small indeed today.
So it is all about people paying for new content. And paid DLC is a much better option for this.
Zenimax have stated that TESO includes a core solo game. They have stated that their is lots new content coming. So this should be an easy option.
If the real reason is that the game has cost them so much that the box price should be e.g. $300 then they should charge $300. Or split out the core game out and sell expansion areas. Messy for a group - sure but that happens whenever you have expansions in a game. And better than telling people the sub is to cover new content when its really to cover the cost of old content. False expectations; recipe for disaster. And your initial sales will have suffered as well.
the hybridization is killing it; in TESO everyone will be a "battlemage" regardless of the class chosen
I stopped taking Tassi seriously in his opening paragraph of his disaster article.
Tassi writes: “Console players, and hell, most PC players these days that aren’t die hard WoW or EVE Online devotees, have no place for the increasingly outdated monthly subscription model.”
There is nothing outdated about a monthly subscription. I have monthly subscriptions to all different forms of entertainment. Netflix, VPN's, many popular games, The gym, I mean come on buddy. It must be nice to be able to spread your drivel through large media outlets.
Just because a few terrible companies released some terrible games free to play doesn't make sub base old and archaic. Absolute nonsense.
Let's be fair. One tv series, not one movie.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Your analogy falls flat on it's face. Just take Eve for example, it could take you a year to visit all it's systems, Lotro is another example of lots of content. I do not grasp your point of view, but for many of us, subscriptions is a cheap way to enjoy a game. Most of these strictly f2p games are merely a money grabs, give me a subscription game any day in the week. At least I get access to all the content. I am still waiting for someone to come up with even a half baked reason why subscriptions won't work. No one in this thread has come even close.
Hes Netflix example is not flawed at all , your example however is exaggerated to say the least.
One Movie..that lasts 2-3 years then ? and one that is constantly updated with diffrent story choices starts and endings sometimes even based on your own choices, (Cool now that I Think about it) but not very doable .
If you pay for a subscription to an MMO you pay for a MMO not a singleplayer game that will last you 2-15 Hours, you pay it because you feel that "maybe" this game will give you Entertainment for months or even years to come. Also if you play such a game you will NOT have time for other games because all you spare time will go to Guild activity etc etc
If It doesn't do that you will ofcouse end your subsription Before the standard MONTH included in the purchase. A Month that most likely will be more than enough to validate your choice in this.
Correcting some figures here from the article:
Skyrim sold 10 million units during the first month of release, representing $650m in retail sales, and that was excluding digital downloads for PC: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-12-16-valve-skyrim-fastest-selling-game-in-steam-history
As of June 2013, Skyrim has doubled that tally with over 20 million units sold, according to Bethesda's official blog.
"As of June 2013, Skyrim has doubled that tally with over 20 million units sold, according toBethesda's official blog. "
Makes you wonder how irate the single-player team must be to see how much money Zenimax is spending on Elder Scrolls Online as opposed to immediately producing a Skyrim sequel.
I don't think it's accurate to refer to a game that has gone from subscription to F2P as "failed" anymore. That experiment is over and the results are in.
LOTRO is a perfect example.
If I were launching a new MMO today I would use the subscription model and higher box prices to launch so I could maximize initial ROI. After the game stabilized I would drop the purchase price to get new players and introduce MTX to retain existing subscribers. Only after I saw sub numbers dropping consistently would I transition to a Rift-type system where you can F2P or sub and participate in an increasing number of MTX transactions.
LOTRO and Rift are both proving the model can work and both still enjoy healthy pops that pay enough to more than keep the lights on.
Want to know more about GW2 and why there is so much buzz? Start here: Guild Wars 2 Mass Info for the Uninitiated
It's wrong to say that GuildWars 2 is generating $8.5 million from MTX monthly. Their Q3 financial report (most recent on their website) says they generated 24,481 million Korean Won from GuildWars2. Using Google to do the FOREX conversion that works out to $23 million, or $7.6 million per month for Q3. However, that's not MTX. That's some mix of MTX AND game sales.
NC Soft provides no guidance on how to split that revenue. However, since the Q3 revenue is comparable to the Q1 and Q2 numbers we should assume that a very large portion is game sales. Conservatively I'd say at least 66%, and maybe more.
Your point #2 is just wrong. Any subscription-based business knows that re-engagement with lapsed subscribers is a key source of revenue. Many players drift in and out of subscriber status over their lifetime engagement with the game. The percentage who can be re-engaged varies from game to game but it's very high.
In my opinion, your point #5 is wrong too. They lost those players because they were AAA Themepark WoW clones, and once players had burned through the content available at launch, they were going to leave no matter what the monetization model is or was. Maximizing the revenue from those people during the first 6 months of the game's life is the only smart thing to do when you know that you're going to lose 90% of them anyway.
SWTOR, RIFT, TERA, AION, TSW.....should I go on?
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
I was reading the wikipedia page on Clash of Clans the other day and it was talking about the companies 2 games making them $2.4 million a day. Small game, lots of fun and not really an end in sight nor something people walk away from. Can every game pull this off, not really. I pay for WoW but usually leave after a few months. Been like this for years. I have recently started up subs for both AoC and TSW, mostly because they offer a cool veteran program. However, I use the MTX in both too. I like having both options available as I feel less restricted. If I cant pay for one for some reason I can still play at least and buy the couple things i need. I personally think that once WoW joins with the rest of the MMO gaming world as far as MTX stuff we will see much less of these debates over whether of not it works. Hell as it is WoW offers vanilla for free. I have come to the point in my gaming that a game has to really draw my attention to be willing to pay the up front $$. There have been games where I tried the beta and as soon as it launch i was at the store. There were others that i never played and just followed the development and at launch was at the store. With the market so flooded with MMOs I believe its getting harder for companies to pull people in to those initial $60 price tags. This is made worse by all the games coming out of Asia that are free out the gate, and are good games to boot.
I am a big supporter of the hybrid model. I often will do a sub and MTX particularly if the company offers great stuff in the MTX shop (AoC and TSW are my favorites). I like not feeling restricted to a sub if it doesnt for for me at that moment. Does WoW get my non-use sub money for a couple months, sure. However, I soon cancel and then am gone for upwards of 6 months. If they did MTX too I would likely stay and still buy some stuff. I am sure there are loads of people who feel this way too...
Sorry, but ok. I forgot to mention in my perfectly valid example that there naturally are games in singleplayer that some players play very long aswell..
Yeah there are singleplayer games that are breaking the mold with long gameplay even in singleplayer, games that you can play for VERY LONG with yourself.
You have a thing for stretching for valid Points I see, even the Skyrim example you gave here to disvalidate my Point doesn't cut it, because there is naturally Always diffrent things that breaks the mold, besides as mentioned Skyrim is a singleplayer game that get's to live long based on it's moddable Community and frequent DLC's or expansions packs, those expansions goes for 20-30 $ each right ? 60 Dollars for the base game + 20*4 . When counting it like this you wil end up with a singlplayer game that you have payd almost as much to as an MMO..Í'd say almost because you can ofcourse release expansions to an MMO aswell and that will make it more expensive , It is a more expensive gametype, COSTs more to develop, to maintain . The only thing Skyrim needs is maybe a bugfix , the rest is maintained by the Community for diffrent needs.
And lastly , I personally would never play a game like Skyrim for that long, I played it maybe max 30 Hours or so, after that I feel that it get's boring. I played the main story ...and gave it up..:) I didnt even Think it was such a great game.
The argument with just one game regarding MMO's is that IF you are serious about it, joining a Guild, starting some raidactivities and all that, you won't have much time left for ANY other games, unless ofcourse you do not have a job or are home 24/7 for any other reason
These games has gone F2P , but the reasons doesn't have anything to do with it's payment model, they where is some form or Another a dissapointment to the players, If they give you a long lasting very good MMO, people will pay it's subscription fee. Most of the above games are rather good, but by the time the free month is over , so is also the urge to play , so why pay a subscrition then when the game is over for most players. They need to build a game with strong Community features that will last very long from the get go, haven't seen such a game in a very long time.
Games:
Currently playing:Nothing
Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
Past games:
Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
Xpiher's GW2
GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
Warhammer - Xpiher
I always find it weird when people talk about subscription number plummeting. Actually, I find that complete and total garbage.
WoW has been losing numbers because it is over ten years old, its entire system is dated, and there are new things out there. That's what happens over time, and its why newspapers are going the way of the dodo bird. Because new and better things have come along. It has nothing at all to do with the game being subscriber based.
Lord of the Rings went to an MTX model when their numbers were crashing and burning so fast they had no other choice. They were taking way too long between expansions and the expansions were focusing solely on a single element of the game (such as focusing ONLY on pvp).
The success of MTX vs subscription is rather hard to figure out. The reason being that nearly all games that offer MTX also offer subscription. Without the game companies releasing the numbers you will NEVER know how many of those players are subscription and how many aren't.
There's also the simple fact that MTX does allow more people to play. But does that mean they are quality players or does that mean they are horrible people who make it their mission to make other players miserable? Generally, what I have seen is that the subscription model keeps these types of players from playing the game and gives more of a community feeling than the other model. And, after all, this is an MMO which is supposed to mean community, not ganking and harassing other players.
An MTX model gives much less of a feeling of connection to the game than a subscriber model does. If someone is paying monthly, they actually WANT the game to succeed because they want to get their moneys worth. The MTX model means that a player doesn't have to pay anything if they don't want to and has no connection to the game so they harass others. Hybrids are a little better, but the MTX players tend to ruin it for the subscribers. In many games, I've found myself shutting down the chats (which defeats the purpose of the MMO) just so I don't have to heard the mouthing off that's coming from the mostly MTX players.
Does the MTX format make money? Yes it does. Does the subscriber format make money? Yes it does. But not everything is about money.
As for the games that have been released, there are new games out there that are going to change the way the MMORPG genre works provided they do what they say they're going to do. And all of the current major development companies are going to be thrown for a loop when they do. They will suddenly find a mass emigration of the current standards to the new, TRUE Next Generation games that will likely be released within the next 5 years or so. Games that have stopped getting big budget publishers to fund them early on in the process and started asking for players help.
You just wait and see.... The current model is going by the wayside. You can flow with the tide, or you will get washed away. Subscription, MTX, or hybrid, players want more than anything that's currently being offered.
Just want to point out this chart is wrong the green is people who want to pay less than the subscription and the purple people who pay more, you can see this from your other chart take Wizard101.
Out of 20,000,000 players only 1,000,000 are subscribers most people who pay more then the subscription fee "also" pay the subscription fee to get those benefits meaning the ones who pay more are less then 1,000,000.
The way the chat is the more it costs the more people want to pay it at a rate approaching infinity which is silly lol the number of people who pay less is much greater then the number who pay more then the subscription fee.
First lets take a look at the guy posting this article.
Hes a guy that started a kickstarer for Pathfinders, he has an invested interest in boosting subscriptions because that is what will be funding HIS game.
He is also pretty terrible at predicting anything RPG related. This article I found has some interesting information about him. He likes to claim the RPG genre is constantly on the donwfall when ever something he does fails.
Take a look at it. http://shutupinternet.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/ryan-dancey-is-destroying-gaming/
From his claims in the past it seems he really isn't a very credible expert when it comes to market trends even when he is an 'insider.'
I also don't think many are taking into account that the IP used was (before ESO) a single player IP. There is going to be some heavy refunding from console sales if at stores selling the console version there is not a huge warning sign posted that the game requires a monthly subscription to continue playing. The reason for this is because it is the first in its series to require anything other than a computer or console. None of the version before even required an internet connection, now this new installment will require a permanent online connection as well as a subscription.
Many of us that post on here I think lose perspective of what its like to not be an invested gamer. We all spend a lot of time in game, or researching games and not as many do this. So besides the payment model being an issue for many, its the console side release that is going to be a huge issue as well. The potential faults of this game are not just on one platform but many, and as such it increases the number of variables that can go wrong.