If people like a game that much that they want to play it a lot, then why begrudge the company by refusing to pay them anything, thats what i don't understand, i see the F2P part of Archeage much the same as SW;TOR's version, in effect, a trial where you can determine if the game is for you or not, at which point, you either pony up and get a sub, or accept that there will always be limits to the gameplay, i don't really see anything wrong with that method at all, and i just think that people who complain about things they got for free, just don't appreciate the things that they have been given.
F2p is not free no matter what iteration of payment model and method is used. Someone pays so that the freeloaders can play without paying. I for one find that I just cannot justify shelling out my hard earned money to subsidize someone else's entertainment. I also cannot imagine what I am missing as a paying customer because I am subsidizing someone else to play. By that I mean that part of what I am paying for is not going to me or my use in game but to support someone else. Therefore, I am not getting the complete value for what I pay for.
I have decided that rather then the f2p craze being some wonder to modern mmo's, that instead f2p is going to be the pane of the same. F2p could be (which I doubt) be great for some game companies. But it is terrible for the paying players and fosters too much "expectation" on the part of those playing for free.
Nah...It seems to a lot of people liking something is not enough of a reason to feel obligated to pay for it. I blame the internet making so many things available for "free".
I can spend $60 on a AAA game or $15 a month on a AAA MMO and get everything. With games like this, I can spend $200 in a month, and the next month have more crap to spend another $200 on and in the end never feel like I'm getting a complete game. If anything, blame publishers for turning good concepts into money pits.
I've never had that feeling in any f2p mmo. Then again I don't feel like I need to have everything in a store when I walk in either.
- Make dungeons a paid option. Either exclusive to elite members, or on a "pay per run" basis.
- Make players pay if they want loot. The way Black Gold did, but better! Like, let them kill the mob, and show them the item the mob dropped, but... put a price tag next to it. Hell, even humiliate players with messages "are you too much of a wimp to miss out on this?"
- Allow only certain quests to be available to free players. Like, all story quests or chain quests should be available only for the weaklings that pay for them.
And then, take it a step further:
- Level cap. Make free players be only able to achieve certain level, while everyone else steamrolls them.
- Stats. Free players get a percentage of what levels / items grant in stats. Hell, even make skills weaker.
- Play time. Don't even let free players be in the game. Limit their access times to stupid hours and even then, for limited bursts, like one hour every four.
And as a coup de grâce, even call free players, on their phones, and have them listen to brainwashing messages about how they are poor / cheap and leeching from the magnanimity of your company.
All jokes aside, I actually expect this to happen some time in the future. And the fault is mainly in the people who pay for this.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway
LoL model is good for a moba although Dota 2 has the best model of all where you pay a set price for what you want, no microtransaction pack bs.
Archage current model is far from great but it works better on an mmorpg than lol model would do IMO.
LoL´s model works super well on a moba because mobas are cheap (indie like) games so its easier to make up the development cost than an actual AAA full on mmorpg. If companies spend less money making mmorpgs then sure a more casual model would work perfect there too, but the greed is too big for that to ever happen. MMO companies now make games with the idea of becoming rich or die trying.
Well like many other have stated, the work(money) that goes into designing, maintaining and updating a massive multi-player role playing game is not on the same scale as a lobby driven, overhead view battle game with 3-5 small maps. There is definitely a necessity to recoup these costs if the game is to survive. can Riot make enough off of skins and boosts to pay the bills and make a nice profit, obviously they can. Could any AAA MMO recoup their costs with the same tactic, not even close to possible.
The free to play model in a MMO has never ever been free to play for everyone. There are those that are paying the bills because they enjoy the game and have the money and use that money to support a game that they enjoy. Then there are the countless minions of the free to play players who always look at what the members have and complain about how unfair it is.
Why people feel they should be able to enjoy the fruits of anothers' labors without giving anything back is just immature and if you will, 'entitled' seems to fit the bill nicely. You can probably tell that I am not particularly a fan of the free to play model, I like the free demo ideas to let people see what a game is kinda like and if they might enjoy it. If they don't end up with a voluntary membership they are just sucking the life out of the game for those that do pay.
So essentially, no just still no. I understand that the average gamer doesn't care about the companies that make the games they play so who cares if they make money. Then when the companies push out less and less completed projects which are just retooled versions of earlier games we wonder why they didn't budget in to come up with new features for 2014 we wonder why they don't put everything they've got into their games, well I feel it's because they know that they will not be compensated for their work and if they are, it will come with rises of entitled complainers about why it's not all free. Ridiculous, you get what you pay for.
The bottom-line for any of these games is if it isn't enough fun that you want to pay for something you won't. It's the companies job to create something you WANT to spend something on, if they don't well then...
EQNext looks like it -tentatively- (as I "trust" $oE as far as I can pick up and throw their "corporate-campus") may be worth spending some money on.
I just cannot justify shelling out my hard earned money to subsidize someone else's entertainment. I also cannot imagine what I am missing as a paying customer because I am subsidizing someone else to play. By that I mean that part of what I am paying for is not going to me or my use in game but to support someone else.
its simple games die when the player base drops to low . F2P allows people to try a game with no risk . also some people spend more money on F2P games since they have stuff ranging from cosmetic to special mounts and pets and items that may be used for aditional effects . you didn't think many companies dropped the P2P formula for no reason did you ? the F2P strategy simple made more money
so as a customer what your missing is their bottom line . its not about you . if you dont want to pay for others to then don't
I understand HOW f2p works. But, someone HAS TO PAY in order for the game to stay alive...NOT just having actual f2p freeloaders. If no one paid a dime in game, then the game dies...no matter how many players play.
As to me not paying and playing for free....why would I wish to have someone else pay my way? If I can afford to pay for it, I will. I just won't pay for someone else to do so for free on MY dime.
interesting food for thought, but the term "whales" was certainly not coined by anyone in the age of LoL... it's a term for big spenders in a casino, and has been for a hundred years
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
MMOs charge a lot of money for what they deliver. The novelty of being online with a few hundred or thousand other people has lost its initial magic. MMOs don't deliver gameplay worth $200 a year. So instead of LoL charging too little I think most mmo devs charge way too much.
.
I think MMO subs have always been cheap. Compare to the price of going to movies or sporting events or even buying books or music or compare to your single player game that you pay $60 for and play for maybe 5-20 hours. Finding something that'll be your main entertainment for the month for $15 is pretty impossible outside of MMOs unless you're into just walking in the park or something. Sure now some MMOs claim to be free but many of them end up costing more than $15 a month if you want a quality experience. That's the "clever marketing" (nice way of saying borderline scam) of many F2P systems.
Not going to say Riot are bad businesspeople, quite the opposite actually.
How would you think Archeage could follow that example in any way and be successful? Lock out classes like Riot locks out characters? Archeage is known for the ability to create your own class, I couldn't imagine locking new players to a set few skill trees.
Cosmetics? well that would be great, and they probably will sell cosmetic stuff on the cash shop, but as a means of revenue cosmetics don't pay all the bills. Gw2 and TSW can survive on cosmetics because they still have a box price. Plus, I like awesome outfits to be earned, it is a status symbol in a game where you grow your character, not like LoL where you start a fresh one each match...
Two completely different games, markets, and trends.
Now Playing: Bless / Summoners War Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
My two favorite pay models are just normal subscription, Runescape's and LoL's.
Subs - Just pay up front and know what your getting right away. No random expenses.
Runescape - A good chunk of the MMO is free, you get to try it out and maybe even just play that version. Then they have a massive amount of content to add to that if you want to add on a sub fee. The f2p players are on their own servers and the p2p players are on their own as well.
I got to check out the game over the weekend. It was more fun than I expected, and thought it would be a game I'd like to support. But that statement right there is exactly why I won't be spending any money on the game. Make me want to spend money. Don't make me feel like I have to.
Aren't those enough reasons to make you "want" to spend money?
What do they have to do, wash your car?
Nah...It seems to a lot of people liking something is not enough of a reason to feel obligated to pay for it. I blame the internet making so many things available for "free".
lol blameing the internet for makeing so many things available for free is truely lolable first the internet doesn't make things available for free people do and it not truely free when you have to pay for internet service not is it that is unless your the kinda person who steals internet by useing someone's wi-fi without paying them a little for the use!!! just because the internet has something uploaded and in turn can be down loaded for free as in not an additional cost does not make the internet makeing it available for "FREE" the person who uploaded it might be shareing something they liked and do not have the permission to make a profit on the distribution of said material the internet is nothing more they a super big storage device in that respect. if you go into blamming anything blame the people who would illeaglelly profet off the internet's use for makeing everything that could be a shared experiance into a leagle issue of money . thank you. now as far as the article goes mmo's be it traditional turn based ,"WoW" style or your action based ie. Tera ,Raider Z, and the like all seem to do one thing tease you with quick and easy methiod to get to point Z is less the issue then the cost to have such perks. sure you can spend years in a free mode to get what you want and where you want or pay to get there in a fraction of time. if I am paying 15+$$ a month then I want to have in that monthly payment a thankyou for your subcribtion amount of virtual coin useable only in the cash shop up front and not have to figure out how to scrape together another 10-40$ to buy additional cash shop currency . not everyone who plays online has a ton of disposable income to blow on a game and it would be nice if companies realises this and adds into the subscribtion fee the bonus of XX$ value in cash shop coins you will recieve for being a sub. to be completely clear here I would more likely spend more money on additional cash shop coins if my sub game me a base amount as part of the deal then I would if I was forced into paying for both a sub with no bonus cash shop coins and a seperate cash shop coin purchase.
As long as gaming houses design MMOs on a template that is fitted to players who only want to play for free, the industry will be remain in stagnation.
My two favorite pay models are just normal subscription, Runescape's and LoL's.
Subs - Just pay up front and know what your getting right away. No random expenses.
Runescape - A good chunk of the MMO is free, you get to try it out and maybe even just play that version. Then they have a massive amount of content to add to that if you want to add on a sub fee. The f2p players are on their own servers and the p2p players are on their own as well.
lol interesting how you see only f2p players are grouped into one server and p2p on there own but in reality I doubt it is like that it is more likely PC players are on one server and consule players are on another if that consule happen to not share the same kinda of operations as the PC like how Xbox and PC could work on the same server because lets face it most PC languages are compatable to microsoft which makes xbox sony had there own language that made it not compatable because the game itself was useally slightly different then that of the xbox / pc version.
Trion has always been this way. Rift used to be such a freaking joke for non-paying players. It was a unlimited demo with limited bag space and so much BS that I did not want to play it and honestly it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth as a PC gamer. Their business model is not a good one: alienate non paying players for those who can pay the world. ArchAge was fun but it was not brilliant nor epic in my book.
Trion has always been this way. Rift used to be such a freaking joke for non-paying players. It was a unlimited demo with limited bag space and so much BS that I did not want to play it and honestly it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth as a PC gamer. Their business model is not a good one: alienate non paying players for those who can pay the world. ArchAge was fun but it was not brilliant nor epic in my book.
ArcheAge is made by XLGames... the model was established and is set by them. Trion has to abide by the developers wishes. They may ask for concessions, but in the end, it is always XLGames decision. Trion's hands are basically tied over the matter. Rift is their game, that game they have full control over.
This reminds me of an article I read over on PennyArcade some years back. Free-to-Play models can be great, but many developers still don't seem to understand how to use it effectively. Essentially the problem is developers are focusing too much on monetization, and 'forcing' players to pay money.
In a F2P model, what should be happening is developers adding in optional ways for people to spend money, and to make them wany to actually spend money on the game. Events, customization / swag, seem to be great ways of getting people to spend money on your game. And this is something most MOBAs understand exceedingly well, not just League of Legends. There are various successful MOBAs on the market currently, all will fairly generous F2P models.
For whatever reason, most MMOs are still stuck with the idea that they need to gate content from their game, in order to get people to pay money. This is not true at all. One of the only MMOs currently that seems to understand this is GW2. Once you own the game, it's yours. You don't need to spend a dime, but if you want some cool stuff or some extra convenience, you have the option to spend money for it.
If nothing else, this is a business model I wish more games would adopt. It's currently a win-win for both the developers and us gamers. It promotes better games, and gives us the option to try them out ahead of time, before we decide if it's worth spending money on. SMITE was one of those games for me recently. I didn't expect to like it, or even spend money on it. Then one day I caved, because the god pack was too good of a deal. And then they kept releasing ridiculously good skins, and it was hard not to buy them. I wasn't forced to do any of these things to enjoy the game, but playing the game made we want to have them.
This is what's missing from most MMOs, and hopefully some of these developers will start to catch on. You don't need to punish your players for not spending money. You need to reward them for playing your game, and make them want to spend money in return. Positive reinforcement trumps negative reinforcement every time.
That article is very true. I got the chance to play on the weekend and i can say that the f2p people and very limited. I had to wait to finish a quest cause i had no labor to craft the item.
I wanted to build a boat and with the f2p model in place it would take like a week of afking to accumulate that much labor. I would be alot more happy if they did it like guild wars 2 cash shop. They made you buy the game of course, But sony entertainment made a good model in free realms for unlimited membership for like 36 dollars which was rather reasonable and you get all the benefits while still having the option of the cashshop. So it feels like you're just buying a game rather than being forced to play it to no waste your subscription time.
Also, Guild wars 2 had boosts, mini pets, and unlimited gathering tools. So what archeage could do is implement boosts like bonus XP, maybe like a boost that gives unlimited labor for a short time period, speed increase. Maybe even a whistle that calls a "cab" that drives you to any place you want much faster than other traveling.
Comparing the business models of a game like Planetside 2 and Archeage would be a more appropriate choice, but the point is still very valid.
Planetside 2 and SOE does a great job of offering a lot of bang for your buck (albeit prices can be a bit steep sometimes unless it's a bundle - even Smedley said so) but at the same time it's not something that you NEED to be able to actually play the game and ALL of the game. PS2 has made me WANT to spend hundreds of bucks on it because I love the game and it's a cheap hobby in comparison to anything else I'd do . I've never felt forced to spend a dime on it though.
However, I understand that you shouldn't be able to occupy the whole game world space with farms and houses just by creating new accounts. Disallowing it completely takes away a big part of the game, though. Restricting F2P accounts to public gardens/etc might be an alternative so people can at least try out all of the features before deciding if the game is for them or not.
Right now it seems that Trion are trying too hard to FORCE people to sub instead of making people WANT to with the current limitations. But it's still beta and Trion seem to have enough competent and dedicated people to see this themselves in time before they shoot themselves in the foot.
"Free players will generate one point for every five minutes of active online gameplay, for a maximum of 288 points every 24 hours if you stay online for that entire time."
I would like to point out that this is false, online labor regen for f2p accounts is at 5 per 5 minutes, not 1.
Patron regen is 10 per 5 online, 5 per 5 offline.
However with taxes on owning land that patrons have, the extra regen essentially goes to that, depending on how many structures/farms you own.
The "free to play" aspect and model of this game is very unforgiving. If you want to be able to be competitive in any sort of way, you must pay, or have people shower you with gifts 24/7.
There really is nothing in the In game Cash Shop that seems remotely attractive or worth the money. I highly suspect that 80% of their sales will come from LP potions and APEX (AchreAge Patron Exchange) similar to REX in Rift.
I think the best models are the normal sub and get the game, no buy this to advance faster and for a game that relies on f2p and cash shop, then NOT asking people to buy.
When players don't feel forced to buy I think there is more chance they will decide to just take a look and see what is on the shop. If they made the shop well, something will probably catch that persons eye and sit in their thoughts.
Comments
F2p is not free no matter what iteration of payment model and method is used. Someone pays so that the freeloaders can play without paying. I for one find that I just cannot justify shelling out my hard earned money to subsidize someone else's entertainment. I also cannot imagine what I am missing as a paying customer because I am subsidizing someone else to play. By that I mean that part of what I am paying for is not going to me or my use in game but to support someone else. Therefore, I am not getting the complete value for what I pay for.
I have decided that rather then the f2p craze being some wonder to modern mmo's, that instead f2p is going to be the pane of the same. F2p could be (which I doubt) be great for some game companies. But it is terrible for the paying players and fosters too much "expectation" on the part of those playing for free.
Let's party like it is 1863!
I've never had that feeling in any f2p mmo. Then again I don't feel like I need to have everything in a store when I walk in either.
Hey, here are some ideas for F2P publishers:
- Make dungeons a paid option. Either exclusive to elite members, or on a "pay per run" basis.
- Make players pay if they want loot. The way Black Gold did, but better! Like, let them kill the mob, and show them the item the mob dropped, but... put a price tag next to it. Hell, even humiliate players with messages "are you too much of a wimp to miss out on this?"
- Allow only certain quests to be available to free players. Like, all story quests or chain quests should be available only for the weaklings that pay for them.
And then, take it a step further:
- Level cap. Make free players be only able to achieve certain level, while everyone else steamrolls them.
- Stats. Free players get a percentage of what levels / items grant in stats. Hell, even make skills weaker.
- Play time. Don't even let free players be in the game. Limit their access times to stupid hours and even then, for limited bursts, like one hour every four.
And as a coup de grâce, even call free players, on their phones, and have them listen to brainwashing messages about how they are poor / cheap and leeching from the magnanimity of your company.
All jokes aside, I actually expect this to happen some time in the future. And the fault is mainly in the people who pay for this.
There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway
LoL model is good for a moba although Dota 2 has the best model of all where you pay a set price for what you want, no microtransaction pack bs.
Archage current model is far from great but it works better on an mmorpg than lol model would do IMO.
Well like many other have stated, the work(money) that goes into designing, maintaining and updating a massive multi-player role playing game is not on the same scale as a lobby driven, overhead view battle game with 3-5 small maps. There is definitely a necessity to recoup these costs if the game is to survive. can Riot make enough off of skins and boosts to pay the bills and make a nice profit, obviously they can. Could any AAA MMO recoup their costs with the same tactic, not even close to possible.
The free to play model in a MMO has never ever been free to play for everyone. There are those that are paying the bills because they enjoy the game and have the money and use that money to support a game that they enjoy. Then there are the countless minions of the free to play players who always look at what the members have and complain about how unfair it is.
Why people feel they should be able to enjoy the fruits of anothers' labors without giving anything back is just immature and if you will, 'entitled' seems to fit the bill nicely. You can probably tell that I am not particularly a fan of the free to play model, I like the free demo ideas to let people see what a game is kinda like and if they might enjoy it. If they don't end up with a voluntary membership they are just sucking the life out of the game for those that do pay.
So essentially, no just still no. I understand that the average gamer doesn't care about the companies that make the games they play so who cares if they make money. Then when the companies push out less and less completed projects which are just retooled versions of earlier games we wonder why they didn't budget in to come up with new features for 2014 we wonder why they don't put everything they've got into their games, well I feel it's because they know that they will not be compensated for their work and if they are, it will come with rises of entitled complainers about why it's not all free. Ridiculous, you get what you pay for.
The bottom-line for any of these games is if it isn't enough fun that you want to pay for something you won't. It's the companies job to create something you WANT to spend something on, if they don't well then...
EQNext looks like it -tentatively- (as I "trust" $oE as far as I can pick up and throw their "corporate-campus") may be worth spending some money on.
I understand HOW f2p works. But, someone HAS TO PAY in order for the game to stay alive...NOT just having actual f2p freeloaders. If no one paid a dime in game, then the game dies...no matter how many players play.
As to me not paying and playing for free....why would I wish to have someone else pay my way? If I can afford to pay for it, I will. I just won't pay for someone else to do so for free on MY dime.
Let's party like it is 1863!
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
I think MMO subs have always been cheap. Compare to the price of going to movies or sporting events or even buying books or music or compare to your single player game that you pay $60 for and play for maybe 5-20 hours. Finding something that'll be your main entertainment for the month for $15 is pretty impossible outside of MMOs unless you're into just walking in the park or something. Sure now some MMOs claim to be free but many of them end up costing more than $15 a month if you want a quality experience. That's the "clever marketing" (nice way of saying borderline scam) of many F2P systems.
Comparing Archeage to LoL?
Not going to say Riot are bad businesspeople, quite the opposite actually.
How would you think Archeage could follow that example in any way and be successful? Lock out classes like Riot locks out characters? Archeage is known for the ability to create your own class, I couldn't imagine locking new players to a set few skill trees.
Cosmetics? well that would be great, and they probably will sell cosmetic stuff on the cash shop, but as a means of revenue cosmetics don't pay all the bills. Gw2 and TSW can survive on cosmetics because they still have a box price. Plus, I like awesome outfits to be earned, it is a status symbol in a game where you grow your character, not like LoL where you start a fresh one each match...
Two completely different games, markets, and trends.
Looking forward to: Crowfall / Lost Ark / Black Desert Mobile
My two favorite pay models are just normal subscription, Runescape's and LoL's.
Subs - Just pay up front and know what your getting right away. No random expenses.
Runescape - A good chunk of the MMO is free, you get to try it out and maybe even just play that version. Then they have a massive amount of content to add to that if you want to add on a sub fee. The f2p players are on their own servers and the p2p players are on their own as well.
lol blameing the internet for makeing so many things available for free is truely lolable first the internet doesn't make things available for free people do and it not truely free when you have to pay for internet service not is it that is unless your the kinda person who steals internet by useing someone's wi-fi without paying them a little for the use!!! just because the internet has something uploaded and in turn can be down loaded for free as in not an additional cost does not make the internet makeing it available for "FREE" the person who uploaded it might be shareing something they liked and do not have the permission to make a profit on the distribution of said material the internet is nothing more they a super big storage device in that respect. if you go into blamming anything blame the people who would illeaglelly profet off the internet's use for makeing everything that could be a shared experiance into a leagle issue of money . thank you. now as far as the article goes mmo's be it traditional turn based ,"WoW" style or your action based ie. Tera ,Raider Z, and the like all seem to do one thing tease you with quick and easy methiod to get to point Z is less the issue then the cost to have such perks. sure you can spend years in a free mode to get what you want and where you want or pay to get there in a fraction of time. if I am paying 15+$$ a month then I want to have in that monthly payment a thankyou for your subcribtion amount of virtual coin useable only in the cash shop up front and not have to figure out how to scrape together another 10-40$ to buy additional cash shop currency . not everyone who plays online has a ton of disposable income to blow on a game and it would be nice if companies realises this and adds into the subscribtion fee the bonus of XX$ value in cash shop coins you will recieve for being a sub. to be completely clear here I would more likely spend more money on additional cash shop coins if my sub game me a base amount as part of the deal then I would if I was forced into paying for both a sub with no bonus cash shop coins and a seperate cash shop coin purchase.
lol interesting how you see only f2p players are grouped into one server and p2p on there own but in reality I doubt it is like that it is more likely PC players are on one server and consule players are on another if that consule happen to not share the same kinda of operations as the PC like how Xbox and PC could work on the same server because lets face it most PC languages are compatable to microsoft which makes xbox sony had there own language that made it not compatable because the game itself was useally slightly different then that of the xbox / pc version.
Trion has always been this way. Rift used to be such a freaking joke for non-paying players. It was a unlimited demo with limited bag space and so much BS that I did not want to play it and honestly it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth as a PC gamer. Their business model is not a good one: alienate non paying players for those who can pay the world. ArchAge was fun but it was not brilliant nor epic in my book.
ArcheAge is made by XLGames... the model was established and is set by them. Trion has to abide by the developers wishes. They may ask for concessions, but in the end, it is always XLGames decision. Trion's hands are basically tied over the matter. Rift is their game, that game they have full control over.
This reminds me of an article I read over on PennyArcade some years back. Free-to-Play models can be great, but many developers still don't seem to understand how to use it effectively. Essentially the problem is developers are focusing too much on monetization, and 'forcing' players to pay money.
In a F2P model, what should be happening is developers adding in optional ways for people to spend money, and to make them wany to actually spend money on the game. Events, customization / swag, seem to be great ways of getting people to spend money on your game. And this is something most MOBAs understand exceedingly well, not just League of Legends. There are various successful MOBAs on the market currently, all will fairly generous F2P models.
For whatever reason, most MMOs are still stuck with the idea that they need to gate content from their game, in order to get people to pay money. This is not true at all. One of the only MMOs currently that seems to understand this is GW2. Once you own the game, it's yours. You don't need to spend a dime, but if you want some cool stuff or some extra convenience, you have the option to spend money for it.
If nothing else, this is a business model I wish more games would adopt. It's currently a win-win for both the developers and us gamers. It promotes better games, and gives us the option to try them out ahead of time, before we decide if it's worth spending money on. SMITE was one of those games for me recently. I didn't expect to like it, or even spend money on it. Then one day I caved, because the god pack was too good of a deal. And then they kept releasing ridiculously good skins, and it was hard not to buy them. I wasn't forced to do any of these things to enjoy the game, but playing the game made we want to have them.
This is what's missing from most MMOs, and hopefully some of these developers will start to catch on. You don't need to punish your players for not spending money. You need to reward them for playing your game, and make them want to spend money in return. Positive reinforcement trumps negative reinforcement every time.
That article is very true. I got the chance to play on the weekend and i can say that the f2p people and very limited. I had to wait to finish a quest cause i had no labor to craft the item.
I wanted to build a boat and with the f2p model in place it would take like a week of afking to accumulate that much labor. I would be alot more happy if they did it like guild wars 2 cash shop. They made you buy the game of course, But sony entertainment made a good model in free realms for unlimited membership for like 36 dollars which was rather reasonable and you get all the benefits while still having the option of the cashshop. So it feels like you're just buying a game rather than being forced to play it to no waste your subscription time.
Also, Guild wars 2 had boosts, mini pets, and unlimited gathering tools. So what archeage could do is implement boosts like bonus XP, maybe like a boost that gives unlimited labor for a short time period, speed increase. Maybe even a whistle that calls a "cab" that drives you to any place you want much faster than other traveling.
Comparing the business models of a game like Planetside 2 and Archeage would be a more appropriate choice, but the point is still very valid.
Planetside 2 and SOE does a great job of offering a lot of bang for your buck (albeit prices can be a bit steep sometimes unless it's a bundle - even Smedley said so) but at the same time it's not something that you NEED to be able to actually play the game and ALL of the game. PS2 has made me WANT to spend hundreds of bucks on it because I love the game and it's a cheap hobby in comparison to anything else I'd do
. I've never felt forced to spend a dime on it though.
However, I understand that you shouldn't be able to occupy the whole game world space with farms and houses just by creating new accounts. Disallowing it completely takes away a big part of the game, though. Restricting F2P accounts to public gardens/etc might be an alternative so people can at least try out all of the features before deciding if the game is for them or not.
Right now it seems that Trion are trying too hard to FORCE people to sub instead of making people WANT to with the current limitations. But it's still beta and Trion seem to have enough competent and dedicated people to see this themselves in time before they shoot themselves in the foot.
I hope.
http://kompaniet.mine.nu :+: #kompaniet @ QuakeNet
"Free players will generate one point for every five minutes of active online gameplay, for a maximum of 288 points every 24 hours if you stay online for that entire time."
I would like to point out that this is false, online labor regen for f2p accounts is at 5 per 5 minutes, not 1.
Patron regen is 10 per 5 online, 5 per 5 offline.
However with taxes on owning land that patrons have, the extra regen essentially goes to that, depending on how many structures/farms you own.
The "free to play" aspect and model of this game is very unforgiving. If you want to be able to be competitive in any sort of way, you must pay, or have people shower you with gifts 24/7.
There really is nothing in the In game Cash Shop that seems remotely attractive or worth the money. I highly suspect that 80% of their sales will come from LP potions and APEX (AchreAge Patron Exchange) similar to REX in Rift.
I think the best models are the normal sub and get the game, no buy this to advance faster and for a game that relies on f2p and cash shop, then NOT asking people to buy.
When players don't feel forced to buy I think there is more chance they will decide to just take a look and see what is on the shop. If they made the shop well, something will probably catch that persons eye and sit in their thoughts.