Originally posted by TribeofOne Does anyone remember what the very first mmo to get a cash shop was? or the first mmo to go F2P w/ cash shop?
Are you looking for the first sub game that added a cash shop, or just the first MMORPG with a cash shop?
Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now working in Network Security. I don't Forum PVP. If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident. When I don't understand, I ask. Such is not intended as criticism.
The first F2P MMO was Nexus Kingdom of the Winds which was free up to max level, then became a sub. That was back in 1996.
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Although heavily instanced to the point that some don't consider it an MMO, the original Guild Wars used a non-sub model (B2P) with a cash shop (introduced in 2006). I'm not familiar enough with MMO lineages, but perhaps GW influenced some of the later games that went F2P, especially in demonstrating viability as a contemporary of WoW.
Originally posted by Flyte27 I've said it before, but it's probably better if the games had been left to die. If they can't survive off a subscription model then they probably aren't that fun. It appears to have caused a major problem in that there are to many MMOs to play. Most of them are free to play and most of them have no challenge so they just hop around becoming bored quickly. If most of these free to play games had died we might have seen something new and there would be more people who would have gone to specific games as there would have been less. Now it seems they are stuck in stagnation with a really bad model. It's especially bad for the consumer. I don't think it's that bad for the companies. They are obviously making more money than they did with subscription models off of people and they don't have to worry as much about support.
Sorry Flyte, but you are completely off base here. This is just another common misconception that the P2P crowd likes to toss around: ie if a game is not subscription it is not fun to play. That is absolutely false. A game can be fun to play but many people may believe that the fun is not worth the price that is being asked. Since your choice is either yes it is worth $15 /month or no, it is not, you are left with a yes or no answer. And with money being tight, no is a popular answer.
By going F2P, suddenly maybe, is part of the answer. You can try the game and pay if you like it. You can play it for free with restrictions and still have fun. Or maybe just pay a little here and there when you feel like it. It simply gives more options to players and people generally like that , hence a more successful game financially.
And just letting a game die?? Are you kidding me? If you had invested millions in developing a game, would you just let it die without doing everything you could to try and make it successful and recoup your investment plus some profit? I think you would or you would not be in business for long. And a bunch of games dying is not exactly going to entice other developers to throw their money into making new games as you suggest. Probably quite the opposite. Another reason you see the proliferation of F2P games.
If it is what the majority of people want, then that is what the game developers are going to try and give them.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
Sorry Flyte, but you are completely off base here. This is just another common misconception that the P2P crowd likes to toss around: ie if a game is not subscription it is not fun to play. That is absolutely false. A game can be fun to play but many people may believe that the fun is not worth the price that is being asked. Since your choice is either yes it is worth $15 /month or no, it is not, you are left with a yes or no answer. And with money being tight, no is a popular answer.
By going F2P, suddenly maybe, is part of the answer. You can try the game and pay if you like it. You can play it for free with restrictions and still have fun. Or maybe just pay a little here and there when you feel like it. It simply gives more options to players and people generally like that , hence a more successful game financially.
And just letting a game die?? Are you kidding me? If you had invested millions in developing a game, would you just let it die without doing everything you could to try and make it successful and recoup your investment plus some profit? I think you would or you would not be in business for long. And a bunch of games dying is not exactly going to entice other developers to throw their money into making new games as you suggest. Probably quite the opposite. Another reason you see the proliferation of F2P games.
If it is what the majority of people want, then that is what the game developers are going to try and give them.
You can compare games that require a subscription fee with games that don't require it, and you see little difference. Certainly not anything that would warrant the $15 a month. You don't get any value for your money. None.
Essentially, you either pay for the priviledge to grind or you pay for shortcuts to the grind.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
You can compare games that require a subscription fee with games that don't require it, and you see little difference. Certainly not anything that would warrant the $15 a month. You don't get any value for your money. None.
Essentially, you either pay for the priviledge to grind or you pay for shortcuts to the grind.
In fact, fun is subjective. So it is quite possible that sub-only games are LESS fun than F2P.
Examples, for MY own preference:
Eve/WoW are less fun than Marvel Heroes, and STO.
So it is obviously that i should play Marvel Heroes and STO, and not WoW/Eve, sub or not.
IMO there is no difference in quality between the f2p and p2p games I've played.
Nor is there a difference in content (awhile ago I did look at the content released in half a dozen games pre and post f2p conversion and they were the same)
No difference in customer service or really anything else.
With everything else being equal between p2p and f2p then the only questions I have for any particular game are:
1. Do I like the game
2. Do I need to pay to play the way I want
3. Am I willing to pay the amount required to play the way I want.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Originally posted by TribeofOne Does anyone remember what the very first mmo to get a cash shop was? or the first mmo to go F2P w/ cash shop?
DDO was the first western game to transition from subscription to F2P, but SoE had a cash shop in Everquest 2 long before that, pretty sure that was the first western MMO to get a cash shop.
As for the first Asian MMO for F2P and a cash shop.... not sure, they seem to have been around for years. Runes of Magic was probably the first high profile one.
EQ2 players could sell their gear, gold, and even their characters for cash
DDO didnt launch until a year later in 2006
The station exchange was an open player market and not really a cash shop, but I do think EQ2 was the first to have a cash shop in a western P2P game. I think they added it way back in 2008. It was unheard of for subscription games back then and unfortunately they set the standard.
The first MMO's with cash shops that I saw were Maplestory back when it came out in NA in 2005, and other Korean MMO's that came out here. The first one I saw that converted from P2P to F2P was DDO, and soon after LOTRO.
Originally posted by Flyte27 I've said it before, but it's probably better if the games had been left to die. If they can't survive off a subscription model then they probably aren't that fun. It appears to have caused a major problem in that there are to many MMOs to play. Most of them are free to play and most of them have no challenge so they just hop around becoming bored quickly. If most of these free to play games had died we might have seen something new and there would be more people who would have gone to specific games as there would have been less. Now it seems they are stuck in stagnation with a really bad model. It's especially bad for the consumer. I don't think it's that bad for the companies. They are obviously making more money than they did with subscription models off of people and they don't have to worry as much about support.
Put it this way:
You made a batch of cakes, and tried to sell them for $15 each, but you weren't getting enough customers who wanted the whole cake.
You could instead offer some free tastings and sell them by the slice, which would result in far more money for your cakes.
Are you saying that if you couldn't sell your cake as the full portion, you would rather throw it in the bin than make more profit? Seems like incredibly bad business sense to me.
Furthermore, you say that F2P is bad for the consumer, where has that been evident? The power to purchase things that are only of interest to you has transitioned to media and music and has pretty much been considered a success universally.
Premium subscriptions can work, but its more of an exception rather than a rule. The bottom line is that most MMO producers simply do not create enough content to warrant a subscription compared to the competition. The content creation speed for MMOs had slowed dramatically in the years before the F2P change, which is why customers had grown tired of the model. Single player games have shown us that we can get updates as DLC and we can have the power to choose what content we want to buy, rather than paying a subscription and hoping for the best.
F2P and B2P models give the power back to the consumer, and that's a good thing.
Don't even get how WoW is better than DDO when DDO is more advanced, has better dungeons and character skills etc. I sware UO had some kind of cash shop to buy characters but it was always sub based. I guess DDO but not sure.
MUDs and eastern MMOs have had them since the 90's but afaik the first major NA/EU MMO to have it was Ultima Online which set up UOGameCodes.com in 2000 or so, and then revamped it in 2003 when they introduced advanced characters for the Age of Shadows expansion.
For almost anything you see in a modern MMO, the following almost always applies:
If it's in your MMO, it was in UO first.
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
Comments
WOW was the first.
Are you looking for the first sub game that added a cash shop, or just the first MMORPG with a cash shop?
"People who tell you youre awesome are useless. No, dangerous.
They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/
Sorry Flyte, but you are completely off base here. This is just another common misconception that the P2P crowd likes to toss around: ie if a game is not subscription it is not fun to play. That is absolutely false. A game can be fun to play but many people may believe that the fun is not worth the price that is being asked. Since your choice is either yes it is worth $15 /month or no, it is not, you are left with a yes or no answer. And with money being tight, no is a popular answer.
By going F2P, suddenly maybe, is part of the answer. You can try the game and pay if you like it. You can play it for free with restrictions and still have fun. Or maybe just pay a little here and there when you feel like it. It simply gives more options to players and people generally like that , hence a more successful game financially.
And just letting a game die?? Are you kidding me? If you had invested millions in developing a game, would you just let it die without doing everything you could to try and make it successful and recoup your investment plus some profit? I think you would or you would not be in business for long. And a bunch of games dying is not exactly going to entice other developers to throw their money into making new games as you suggest. Probably quite the opposite. Another reason you see the proliferation of F2P games.
If it is what the majority of people want, then that is what the game developers are going to try and give them.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
You can compare games that require a subscription fee with games that don't require it, and you see little difference. Certainly not anything that would warrant the $15 a month. You don't get any value for your money. None.
Essentially, you either pay for the priviledge to grind or you pay for shortcuts to the grind.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
In fact, fun is subjective. So it is quite possible that sub-only games are LESS fun than F2P.
Examples, for MY own preference:
Eve/WoW are less fun than Marvel Heroes, and STO.
So it is obviously that i should play Marvel Heroes and STO, and not WoW/Eve, sub or not.
IMO there is no difference in quality between the f2p and p2p games I've played.
Nor is there a difference in content (awhile ago I did look at the content released in half a dozen games pre and post f2p conversion and they were the same)
No difference in customer service or really anything else.
With everything else being equal between p2p and f2p then the only questions I have for any particular game are:
1. Do I like the game
2. Do I need to pay to play the way I want
3. Am I willing to pay the amount required to play the way I want.
DDO was the first western game to transition from subscription to F2P, but SoE had a cash shop in Everquest 2 long before that, pretty sure that was the first western MMO to get a cash shop.
As for the first Asian MMO for F2P and a cash shop.... not sure, they seem to have been around for years. Runes of Magic was probably the first high profile one.
The station exchange was an open player market and not really a cash shop, but I do think EQ2 was the first to have a cash shop in a western P2P game. I think they added it way back in 2008. It was unheard of for subscription games back then and unfortunately they set the standard.
Put it this way:
You made a batch of cakes, and tried to sell them for $15 each, but you weren't getting enough customers who wanted the whole cake.
You could instead offer some free tastings and sell them by the slice, which would result in far more money for your cakes.
Are you saying that if you couldn't sell your cake as the full portion, you would rather throw it in the bin than make more profit? Seems like incredibly bad business sense to me.
Furthermore, you say that F2P is bad for the consumer, where has that been evident? The power to purchase things that are only of interest to you has transitioned to media and music and has pretty much been considered a success universally.
Premium subscriptions can work, but its more of an exception rather than a rule. The bottom line is that most MMO producers simply do not create enough content to warrant a subscription compared to the competition. The content creation speed for MMOs had slowed dramatically in the years before the F2P change, which is why customers had grown tired of the model. Single player games have shown us that we can get updates as DLC and we can have the power to choose what content we want to buy, rather than paying a subscription and hoping for the best.
F2P and B2P models give the power back to the consumer, and that's a good thing.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
MUDs and eastern MMOs have had them since the 90's but afaik the first major NA/EU MMO to have it was Ultima Online which set up UOGameCodes.com in 2000 or so, and then revamped it in 2003 when they introduced advanced characters for the Age of Shadows expansion.
For almost anything you see in a modern MMO, the following almost always applies:
If it's in your MMO, it was in UO first.
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
UO had raids?
other features:
Shadowbane was the first mmo to have dynamic content
Anarchy Online was the first mmo to have instances, EQ1 had instances in 2003 w LDON
City of Heroes was the first mmo offer sidekicking, EQ2 had mentoring in 2005
EQ2 fan sites