In the top 10 money making games (and most listed here on MMORPG.com), all but ONE is sub-only (WOW).
And wow is only #7, and making less than half compared to LoL.
This pretty much shows that to make money, F2P beats P2P, and often you don't even need a virtual world.
Of course F2P will more then likely make more money, why? Becuase they nickle and dime you to death thus adding up quickly. You want to press the play button? Thatll be 5 dollars. You want to create an additional character? Thatll be 10 dollars. You want to accept that quest? Thatll be 5 dollars. You want to loot that item or use an item? Thatll be 5 dollars. MMOs or any RPG is built on the idea that we go after loot/items/appearance stuff therefor theres a supply and demand for it and developers know they can charge for it. If someone really wants an item but has to pay for it, they will simply because its there but only for a price.
I personally hate Free to play. For many reasons, 1 being the community goes to hell. Players are worse caliber, and in my opinion, the content we get is of worse quality(Rift is good but thats the only F2P game that has a decent model)
So, it shouldnt be a surprise that a f2p game will make more money. Thats simply because you have to pay for every little thing you do(minus the one game I mentioned) Its pathetic in my eyes. Total BS
I've played several F2P MMO's and other types of F2P games without spending a penny. If you're the type of player who has no impulse control, I can see why you'd think that you have to spend money on every little thing.
I've played many F2P games and the ONLY game I have spent any money in was Everquest 2 and that was for an appearance set of armor. Other then that, I havent spent a penny because I cannot stand the dumb f'ng nickle and diming that companies turn into when they go F2P.
Like I said, want to create another toon? 5 bucks, want another hotbar? 2 bucks, want more then 5 hotkeys? 10 bucks, want this? 20 bucks, want that? 10 bucks, want to lick my chode? 10 bucks, want to stroke my a$$hole? 10 bucks... I mean come on... The idea of Free to play is cool but when you realize that they actually make you spend more to get what you were getting with a sub, thats just highway robbery. I still do not understand how ppl defend F2P games... I just dont get it. Get a damn job and pay a sub and youll get more then what you need vs a free to play game where you HAVE To spend more to get equivalent of what youd get in a sub game...
Lets assume wow has 4m NA/Eu players at $15 a month thats 60m in revenue every month so how did wow not make $720+m in revenue ? That chart is revenue not profit so wows numbers should be way higher.
In fact the chart says based on free to play earnings and wow is not f2p so how is it even on the list ?
Read the whole page before you say the numbers are fake. It specifically states that the numbers are strictly for the F2P portions of game earnings, they don't include sub revenue. All cash shop revenue is reported as F2P, and WoW does have one of those.
Well then the whole argument is moot. The topic for this thread says "New data settles it, F2P makes much more money than P2P" which is false if it's "strictly for the F2P portions"...
Like I said, want to create another toon? 5 bucks, want another hotbar? 2 bucks, want more then 5 hotkeys? 10 bucks, want this? 20 bucks, want that? 10 bucks, want to lick my chode? 10 bucks, want to stroke my a$$hole? 10 bucks... I mean come on... The idea of Free to play is cool but when you realize that they actually make you spend more to get what you were getting with a sub, thats just highway robbery. I still do not understand how ppl defend F2P games... I just dont get it. Get a damn job and pay a sub and youll get more then what you need vs a free to play game where you HAVE To spend more to get equivalent of what youd get in a sub game...
I would say the opposite.
You are getting part of the game for free. Want another toon, sign up for another free account.
I would spend $500 on a meal with my wife .. but why should i pay for a sub when i can have the same (or better) amount of fun for free?
Tell me .. is there a sub-only Star Trek MMO even if i am willing to put in the money? I don't think so.
Proves how dumb MMOers are (And yes, I'm one of them too!).
We are being milked and your all loving it. The F2Pers that never spend a dime must be laughing their butts off; someone said it in the other post with this link "The whales are in vast numbers!" lol.
I'll stick to my sub only games; you know where you stand with Eve (At least til your scammed lol).
No trials. No tricks. No traps. No EU-RP server. NO THANKS!
Like I said, want to create another toon? 5 bucks, want another hotbar? 2 bucks, want more then 5 hotkeys? 10 bucks, want this? 20 bucks, want that? 10 bucks, want to lick my chode? 10 bucks, want to stroke my a$$hole? 10 bucks... I mean come on... The idea of Free to play is cool but when you realize that they actually make you spend more to get what you were getting with a sub, thats just highway robbery. I still do not understand how ppl defend F2P games... I just dont get it. Get a damn job and pay a sub and youll get more then what you need vs a free to play game where you HAVE To spend more to get equivalent of what youd get in a sub game...
I would say the opposite.
You are getting part of the game for free. Want another toon, sign up for another free account.
I would spend $500 on a meal with my wife .. but why should i pay for a sub when i can have the same (or better) amount of fun for free?
Tell me .. is there a sub-only Star Trek MMO even if i am willing to put in the money? I don't think so.
2 things.
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me. reading your posts takes my back to my teens. When I worked at the local supermarket deli. Each day we'd put out a sample tray with the Cold Cut ends or whatever had just expired the day before. And there was always this one guy in town who'd come in put one item in his hand-basket and walk around the store for a couple of hours not really shopping but just there to "casually" swing by the deli counter once every 5-10 minutes just to get a "free lunch" . The amount of food that he actually ate probably amounted to less than a paltry snack. All that time and effort wasted for so little food. The Irony is that he was a local college professor. The calories he burned walking around the store probably offset his "free lunch"
2. You are confusing Publisher/Developer motivations with player's desires. It's an old saying but......"If you build it they will come" Except no one's really been building anything worth coming to or staying at.
"If the hybrid money is the one that brings in the most money, and allows a game to continue far longer than a failed P2P model, why don't all of these new companies start with the hybrid model?"
Why do they have to go through the stigma of "failing" for them to change their model, which as you say, is a far more profitable option? Please explain that to me? I know that a company has contingency plans, but why would they start with their "worst" option to begin with? If Hybrid is the "BEST" model, why does it require a failure before it is instituted?
The reason that companies start with P2P is because that is the PREFERED model. It's a best model if they can sustain it. Which means, hybrid is the second best model and one that only works once the game has already failed.
That's my issue with this whole 22 page thread. People come in here saying HYBRD is the BEST! No it's not, it's the best option for an mmo that has already failed. That's a big difference in looking at hybrid models.
PS - How does your analysis of the P2P model change when it comes to Blizzard and SquareEnix. They are the only two publishers who don't rely on outside investment. They do not need to turn a profit within 6 months of release. They self-fund the entire project. Maybe that should also factor into your analysis on which model is best.
I can't remember whether I stated it in this thread or not, so I will again: the best pattern appears to be to start as sub only and claim loudly that you intend to remain that way, then switch to a hybrid model after box sales start trickling down to next to nothing, and subscriber numbers start consistently decreasing month to month. Staying sub only forever, or starting out with a free option, both leave substantial amounts of money on the table.
What you aren't understanding is that it isn't the games that are failing, it is the model itself. It worked for WoW because the market when WoW launched was fundamentally immature, and they had no real competition. Fast forward ten years, and the market has matured and stabilized. New MMOs today don't appear to be growing the market in any real way, they are just poaching players from other MMOs. In a marketplace with dozens of viable options, most of which can be played to some extent for free, it is virtually impossible, if not actually impossible to have a new game launch with a great enough quantity of content to keep a substantial number of people subscribed long term.
If your game has a low enough creation budget and operating costs, like EvE, that might be just fine, because you don't need a substantial number to turn a profit. Games with budgets in the hundreds of millions, like TOR and ESO, need a different level of success. The market conditions which allowed one AAA game (WoW) to succeed without an extensive free option for so many years are simply not present for new games. In terms of it's utility for big games, all signs point to the sub only model being a one-shot deal.
That is why a game doesn't stay sub-only: not because the games "fail" but because the shape of the market has changed, and the model doesn't hold up long-term for new products.
Which brings us to the other issue: why not launch hybrid if you know you will almost certainly end up that way? The answer to that one is simple, it's the same reason for a large portion of F2P revenue: poor impulse control. Even if people know or suspect that a game will eventually have a free option, when big games come out they have enough hype that there are hundreds of thousands or millions of people who simply aren't willing to wait, even if they would prefer the free option. Because of this, truly big games are likely to get enough money from box sales alone to get back their development costs, then they milk the initial batch of players for subscriptions for a few months before the new game smell wear off. Going hybrid from day one would leave tens or hundreds of millions of dollars on the table that could have ended up in the company coffers.
Originally posted by lizardbones
I get what you're saying about P2P being the preferred method. Of course it is, because it generates the most revenue and is the highest profit per player. The problem is that for all those games you listed it just didn't work. If it was the ideal method, it would still be working, and it didn't. So while P2P may be preferred, P2P followed by F2P is ideal, because it actually works.
Except the numbers being reported actually don't support the theory that pure P2P generates the highest profit per player. Remember, WoW didn't add a comprehensive free option, but it still added the cash shop. The reason is that, apparently, the average revenue per subscriber in a game that includes both subs and a cash shop fluctuates in a given month anywhere from $25/player to $40/player. Substantially better than limiting the possibility to $15. The main reason games that add a cash shop typically add a free option at the same time is because they figure as long as they have the cash shop to let people spend more than the price of a sub, they might as well rake in money from the people who want to spend less as well.
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.
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me.
What teaser sampling? I finish Marvel Heroes (all the story content) without paying a dime. Sure, it is only for the free hero. But don't you think it s pretty good value to get a free full meal, even when you cannot choose whether to get set menu A or B?
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me.
What teaser sampling? I finish Marvel Heroes (all the story content) without paying a dime. Sure, it is only for the free hero. But don't you think it s pretty good value to get a free full meal, even when you cannot choose whether to get set menu A or B?
Are you done with Marvel now?
Even if you aren't it's only one game. Your overall aproach to F2P gaming required you to hop from game to game.
This is the teaser. You call it a value but for almost everyone else out there, it fails to address the dealbreaker. The issue that would cause the majority of people in this genre to quit.
Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.
Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.
Not a good idea to make categorical statements like that. MMO isn't the whole designation. Are there some people who want MMORPGs to "live" in for years on end? Sure. But there are also a lot of people want MMOrpgs for the PvP, and a fair number of them like to "dominate" in more than one game. Then there are the substantial number of people who just want mmoRPGs because they enjoy RPG content and want more and/or different than what they are finding offline. There are a lot of different audiences, and most of them aren't searching for one game to rule them all.
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.
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me.
What teaser sampling? I finish Marvel Heroes (all the story content) without paying a dime. Sure, it is only for the free hero. But don't you think it s pretty good value to get a free full meal, even when you cannot choose whether to get set menu A or B?
Are you done with Marvel now?
Even if you aren't it's only one game. Your overall aproach to F2P gaming required you to hop from game to game.
This is the teaser. You call it a value but for almost everyone else out there, it fails to address the dealbreaker. The issue that would cause the majority of people in this genre to quit.
Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.
And yet people are frequently game hopping MMOs, regardless of their business model. WAR, AoC, Secret World, Age of Wushu, GW2, FFXIV, DCUO, Defiance; the list goes on and on and on. All (but WAR) still have people playing, all have had mass amounts of players migrate to other games. Many (but not all) of those are, or were, subscription models.
Furthermore, you also have games like League of Legends, & WoW which have had long term fans for many years.
This data, while it may seem like 'news' to these forums, has been known by developers & publishers for years now. After companies like Turbine tried F2P, many companies have experimented & gathered data on the F2P model. It's long been proven to generate more revenue.
One of the main reasons MMOs still charge subs, is because they can double dip. Too many MMO gamers seem to think that having a subscription guaruntees quality. Even though it's completely unsubstantiated by actual data. So companies will continue to launch w/ subs, because it's less risky than F2P. They are guarunteed money back upfront, and can then switch to a F2P later to keep the game going.
- Many people like to point to WoW as an example for P2P, but it's a poor example. WoW is an outlier, with many outside factors which contributed to its success. Factors which cannot be recreated by others within the current market.
I get what you're saying about P2P being the preferred method. Of course it is, because it generates the most revenue and is the highest profit per player. The problem is that for all those games you listed it just didn't work. If it was the ideal method, it would still be working, and it didn't. So while P2P may be preferred, P2P followed by F2P is ideal, because it actually works.
Except the numbers being reported actually don't support the theory that pure P2P generates the highest profit per player. Remember, WoW didn't add a comprehensive free option, but it still added the cash shop. The reason is that, apparently, the average revenue per subscriber in a game that includes both subs and a cash shop fluctuates in a given month anywhere from $25/player to $40/player. Substantially better than limiting the possibility to $15. The main reason games that add a cash shop typically add a free option at the same time is because they figure as long as they have the cash shop to let people spend more than the price of a sub, they might as well rake in money from the people who want to spend less as well.
Somewhere in the mass of numbers and infographics is the average amount paid per player with F2P systems. It's less than what is usually spent per player "before". I'd love to pull a bunch of numbers out of my butt, but I can't. Keep in mind that with F2P, while there are a bunch of people spending a bunch of money, there were a bunch of people spending a bunch of money under P2P systems as well. We have a quote from Raph Koster telling us so no these forums. :-)
So ideally, players paying a sub and buying things from a cash shop is the most profit per player. But as I said, for many games, possibly any game except WoW now, it just doesn't work long term. But that's fine because even if F2P doesn't grab as high a percentage of profits per player, it's revenue that would otherwise go untapped. More profit is more profit, and after the high end of the revenue curve is tapped out, the mid to low end is the only place left to make money. The alternative is just to shut down.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
When I have questioned these sort of figures before I have been told "they are excepted by the industry" as if that is an end of it. If that is so the industry needs to wake up.
Originally posted by SirPKsAlot What are the downfalls of the freemium model (free to play + optional sub bonuses), as long as there's no P2W cash shop?
You don't get the whales to spend as much?
Sorry, I meant from the player perspective. It seems like the most balanced model because free players can enjoy the game and sub players can be rewarded for supporting the game, without unbalancing gameplay.
I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.
I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.
This is you: blah blah, grind is rediculous. How can anyone stand it
This is the OP: ya... I wont' bother with crafting blah getting good gear blah. I'm going to move to different game soon anyway.
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me.
What teaser sampling? I finish Marvel Heroes (all the story content) without paying a dime. Sure, it is only for the free hero. But don't you think it s pretty good value to get a free full meal, even when you cannot choose whether to get set menu A or B?
Are you done with Marvel now?
Even if you aren't it's only one game. Your overall aproach to F2P gaming required you to hop from game to game.
This is the teaser. You call it a value but for almost everyone else out there, it fails to address the dealbreaker. The issue that would cause the majority of people in this genre to quit.
Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.
And yet people are frequently game hopping MMOs, regardless of their business model. WAR, AoC, Secret World, Age of Wushu, GW2, FFXIV, DCUO, Defiance; the list goes on and on and on. All (but WAR) still have people playing, all have had mass amounts of players migrate to other games. Many (but not all) of those are, or were, subscription models.
Furthermore, you also have games like League of Legends, & WoW which have had long term fans for many years.
This data, while it may seem like 'news' to these forums, has been known by developers & publishers for years now. After companies like Turbine tried F2P, many companies have experimented & gathered data on the F2P model. It's long been proven to generate more revenue.
One of the main reasons MMOs still charge subs, is because they can double dip. Too many MMO gamers seem to think that having a subscription guaruntees quality. Even though it's completely unsubstantiated by actual data. So companies will continue to launch w/ subs, because it's less risky than F2P. They are guarunteed money back upfront, and can then switch to a F2P later to keep the game going.
- Many people like to point to WoW as an example for P2P, but it's a poor example. WoW is an outlier, with many outside factors which contributed to its success. Factors which cannot be recreated by others within the current market.
When I made the statement I made, I did, indeed think about it before I posted it. I realize it's generally not a good Idea to make sweeping claims like that, but as I said, I did think about it. And I will stand by it.
I still believe that we are talking about a pillar in the foundation of what makes an MMORPG. I am not talking about players sticking to only one MMORPG since I also am playing more than one. But I am saying that in it's fundamental design, the idea of continuously abandoning one character/game for another in some kind of rapid succession runs against what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG.
I am going to pose a question here too. For those players who "game hop" what do you think the ratio of players are who are game hopping because they are looking for, but cant find the right MMORPG to suit their needs, vs. the mentality similar to this thread's OP?
Also, you have included titles that are not MMORPGs. Players active in both LoL and WoW (Or any other MMO) is not what I am discussing.
Still, I suppose I probably should have worded my earlier response to the OP more along the lines of the question I just asked in this post. It might have come across better that way.
I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.
This used to be the only way to play. You clicked and waited or you ground out those mobs to get what you wanted. Maybe F2P is just "Old School" under a new name. :-)
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
how nice we are comparing apples with oranges and trowing some bananas in the mix.
This still means absolutely nothin becaus the apples have games with subs and the other category's do not.
total bullshit comparison.
Games are games. It is not like people who are playing MMORPGs would not play FPS, or MOBA.
And yes, comparing apples to oranges is appropriate when i need to decide what fruit to eat tonight.
Let me get this strait:
SO, are you now claiming, that your repetitive argument is indeed a farce..? Literally, back-up by nothing other than your own playstyle..?
You have essentially stated, that you have trolled everyone in this thread and foolishly wasted our time..? (Yes.. you have opinions... that are not facts.)
I played EQ from 1999 so I have played older games of this genre and know how they were played but Neverwinter does not have the cache EQ had therefore the grind is very jarring for me and the fact that I have to spend the real cash for something so basic as level 20 armourcraft has my teeth on edge and honestly EQ was never about the grind but the people you chatted with while you waited for the spawn . You do not do that in Neverwinter try running a daily Dungeon Delve in it and you will understand.
Comparing a grind in EQ and Neverwinter without the surrounding elements is not a fair comparison. I would sit for days in a room camping a mob for EQ but I will never grind that for Neverwinter. Why ? No idea.
I even ground out mobs in EQ 2 for lore weapons but I am loath to do it in Neverwinter may be because the game fails to invoke the same type of commitment in me that the other games managed.
Comments
Games are games. It is not like people who are playing MMORPGs would not play FPS, or MOBA.
And yes, comparing apples to oranges is appropriate when i need to decide what fruit to eat tonight.
I've played many F2P games and the ONLY game I have spent any money in was Everquest 2 and that was for an appearance set of armor. Other then that, I havent spent a penny because I cannot stand the dumb f'ng nickle and diming that companies turn into when they go F2P.
Like I said, want to create another toon? 5 bucks, want another hotbar? 2 bucks, want more then 5 hotkeys? 10 bucks, want this? 20 bucks, want that? 10 bucks, want to lick my chode? 10 bucks, want to stroke my a$$hole? 10 bucks... I mean come on... The idea of Free to play is cool but when you realize that they actually make you spend more to get what you were getting with a sub, thats just highway robbery. I still do not understand how ppl defend F2P games... I just dont get it. Get a damn job and pay a sub and youll get more then what you need vs a free to play game where you HAVE To spend more to get equivalent of what youd get in a sub game...
Well then the whole argument is moot. The topic for this thread says "New data settles it, F2P makes much more money than P2P" which is false if it's "strictly for the F2P portions"...
This proves F2P is anything but.
I would say the opposite.
You are getting part of the game for free. Want another toon, sign up for another free account.
I would spend $500 on a meal with my wife .. but why should i pay for a sub when i can have the same (or better) amount of fun for free?
Tell me .. is there a sub-only Star Trek MMO even if i am willing to put in the money? I don't think so.
No ... this proves that F2P is anything but ... for the whales. For me, they are 100% free.
Nothing is 100% free.
I have said this before, even if you are not paying with money, you are paying with quality and polish. Or rather, we all do.
Every player freeloading contributes to making the budgets of these games smaller, and thus contributes to making the games worse in the long run.
It doesn't matter if a whale is carrying you, he would spend that money anyway.
In the end, less money spent overall = smaller budgets = worse games.
Proves how dumb MMOers are (And yes, I'm one of them too!).
We are being milked and your all loving it. The F2Pers that never spend a dime must be laughing their butts off; someone said it in the other post with this link "The whales are in vast numbers!" lol.
I'll stick to my sub only games; you know where you stand with Eve (At least til your scammed lol).
No trials. No tricks. No traps. No EU-RP server. NO THANKS!
...10% Benevolence, 90% Arrogance in my case!
2 things.
1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me. reading your posts takes my back to my teens. When I worked at the local supermarket deli. Each day we'd put out a sample tray with the Cold Cut ends or whatever had just expired the day before. And there was always this one guy in town who'd come in put one item in his hand-basket and walk around the store for a couple of hours not really shopping but just there to "casually" swing by the deli counter once every 5-10 minutes just to get a "free lunch" . The amount of food that he actually ate probably amounted to less than a paltry snack. All that time and effort wasted for so little food. The Irony is that he was a local college professor. The calories he burned walking around the store probably offset his "free lunch"
2. You are confusing Publisher/Developer motivations with player's desires. It's an old saying but......"If you build it they will come" Except no one's really been building anything worth coming to or staying at.
I can't remember whether I stated it in this thread or not, so I will again: the best pattern appears to be to start as sub only and claim loudly that you intend to remain that way, then switch to a hybrid model after box sales start trickling down to next to nothing, and subscriber numbers start consistently decreasing month to month. Staying sub only forever, or starting out with a free option, both leave substantial amounts of money on the table.
What you aren't understanding is that it isn't the games that are failing, it is the model itself. It worked for WoW because the market when WoW launched was fundamentally immature, and they had no real competition. Fast forward ten years, and the market has matured and stabilized. New MMOs today don't appear to be growing the market in any real way, they are just poaching players from other MMOs. In a marketplace with dozens of viable options, most of which can be played to some extent for free, it is virtually impossible, if not actually impossible to have a new game launch with a great enough quantity of content to keep a substantial number of people subscribed long term.
If your game has a low enough creation budget and operating costs, like EvE, that might be just fine, because you don't need a substantial number to turn a profit. Games with budgets in the hundreds of millions, like TOR and ESO, need a different level of success. The market conditions which allowed one AAA game (WoW) to succeed without an extensive free option for so many years are simply not present for new games. In terms of it's utility for big games, all signs point to the sub only model being a one-shot deal.
That is why a game doesn't stay sub-only: not because the games "fail" but because the shape of the market has changed, and the model doesn't hold up long-term for new products.
Which brings us to the other issue: why not launch hybrid if you know you will almost certainly end up that way? The answer to that one is simple, it's the same reason for a large portion of F2P revenue: poor impulse control. Even if people know or suspect that a game will eventually have a free option, when big games come out they have enough hype that there are hundreds of thousands or millions of people who simply aren't willing to wait, even if they would prefer the free option. Because of this, truly big games are likely to get enough money from box sales alone to get back their development costs, then they milk the initial batch of players for subscriptions for a few months before the new game smell wear off. Going hybrid from day one would leave tens or hundreds of millions of dollars on the table that could have ended up in the company coffers.
Except the numbers being reported actually don't support the theory that pure P2P generates the highest profit per player. Remember, WoW didn't add a comprehensive free option, but it still added the cash shop. The reason is that, apparently, the average revenue per subscriber in a game that includes both subs and a cash shop fluctuates in a given month anywhere from $25/player to $40/player. Substantially better than limiting the possibility to $15. The main reason games that add a cash shop typically add a free option at the same time is because they figure as long as they have the cash shop to let people spend more than the price of a sub, they might as well rake in money from the people who want to spend less as well.
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.
Are you done with Marvel now?
Even if you aren't it's only one game. Your overall aproach to F2P gaming required you to hop from game to game.
This is the teaser. You call it a value but for almost everyone else out there, it fails to address the dealbreaker. The issue that would cause the majority of people in this genre to quit.
Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.
Not a good idea to make categorical statements like that. MMO isn't the whole designation. Are there some people who want MMORPGs to "live" in for years on end? Sure. But there are also a lot of people want MMOrpgs for the PvP, and a fair number of them like to "dominate" in more than one game. Then there are the substantial number of people who just want mmoRPGs because they enjoy RPG content and want more and/or different than what they are finding offline. There are a lot of different audiences, and most of them aren't searching for one game to rule them all.
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.
This is a weird post. Basically the OP brags about not spending a dime because other suckers is spending money for him.
Of course he is pro F2P model.
And yet people are frequently game hopping MMOs, regardless of their business model. WAR, AoC, Secret World, Age of Wushu, GW2, FFXIV, DCUO, Defiance; the list goes on and on and on. All (but WAR) still have people playing, all have had mass amounts of players migrate to other games. Many (but not all) of those are, or were, subscription models.
Furthermore, you also have games like League of Legends, & WoW which have had long term fans for many years.
This data, while it may seem like 'news' to these forums, has been known by developers & publishers for years now. After companies like Turbine tried F2P, many companies have experimented & gathered data on the F2P model. It's long been proven to generate more revenue.
One of the main reasons MMOs still charge subs, is because they can double dip. Too many MMO gamers seem to think that having a subscription guaruntees quality. Even though it's completely unsubstantiated by actual data. So companies will continue to launch w/ subs, because it's less risky than F2P. They are guarunteed money back upfront, and can then switch to a F2P later to keep the game going.
- Many people like to point to WoW as an example for P2P, but it's a poor example. WoW is an outlier, with many outside factors which contributed to its success. Factors which cannot be recreated by others within the current market.
Somewhere in the mass of numbers and infographics is the average amount paid per player with F2P systems. It's less than what is usually spent per player "before". I'd love to pull a bunch of numbers out of my butt, but I can't. Keep in mind that with F2P, while there are a bunch of people spending a bunch of money, there were a bunch of people spending a bunch of money under P2P systems as well. We have a quote from Raph Koster telling us so no these forums. :-)
So ideally, players paying a sub and buying things from a cash shop is the most profit per player. But as I said, for many games, possibly any game except WoW now, it just doesn't work long term. But that's fine because even if F2P doesn't grab as high a percentage of profits per player, it's revenue that would otherwise go untapped. More profit is more profit, and after the high end of the revenue curve is tapped out, the mid to low end is the only place left to make money. The alternative is just to shut down.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Sorry, I meant from the player perspective. It seems like the most balanced model because free players can enjoy the game and sub players can be rewarded for supporting the game, without unbalancing gameplay.
Currently playing: Eldevin Online as a Deadly Assassin
I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.
This is you: blah blah, grind is rediculous. How can anyone stand it
This is the OP: ya... I wont' bother with crafting blah getting good gear blah. I'm going to move to different game soon anyway.
When I made the statement I made, I did, indeed think about it before I posted it. I realize it's generally not a good Idea to make sweeping claims like that, but as I said, I did think about it. And I will stand by it.
I still believe that we are talking about a pillar in the foundation of what makes an MMORPG. I am not talking about players sticking to only one MMORPG since I also am playing more than one. But I am saying that in it's fundamental design, the idea of continuously abandoning one character/game for another in some kind of rapid succession runs against what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG.
I am going to pose a question here too. For those players who "game hop" what do you think the ratio of players are who are game hopping because they are looking for, but cant find the right MMORPG to suit their needs, vs. the mentality similar to this thread's OP?
Also, you have included titles that are not MMORPGs. Players active in both LoL and WoW (Or any other MMO) is not what I am discussing.
Still, I suppose I probably should have worded my earlier response to the OP more along the lines of the question I just asked in this post. It might have come across better that way.
This used to be the only way to play. You clicked and waited or you ground out those mobs to get what you wanted. Maybe F2P is just "Old School" under a new name. :-)
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Let me get this strait:
SO, are you now claiming, that your repetitive argument is indeed a farce..? Literally, back-up by nothing other than your own playstyle..?
You have essentially stated, that you have trolled everyone in this thread and foolishly wasted our time..? (Yes.. you have opinions... that are not facts.)
I played EQ from 1999 so I have played older games of this genre and know how they were played but Neverwinter does not have the cache EQ had therefore the grind is very jarring for me and the fact that I have to spend the real cash for something so basic as level 20 armourcraft has my teeth on edge and honestly EQ was never about the grind but the people you chatted with while you waited for the spawn . You do not do that in Neverwinter try running a daily Dungeon Delve in it and you will understand.
Comparing a grind in EQ and Neverwinter without the surrounding elements is not a fair comparison. I would sit for days in a room camping a mob for EQ but I will never grind that for Neverwinter. Why ? No idea.
I even ground out mobs in EQ 2 for lore weapons but I am loath to do it in Neverwinter may be because the game fails to invoke the same type of commitment in me that the other games managed.