"P.S. The marketing cost of launching a P2P games is 5-10x the development cost. For a F2P game it is .5-1x the cost. This is why F2P is lower risk... and cheaper."
That statement alone makes your entire spiel nonsense. Marketing is expensive, but it does not cost even clost to the development costs let alone 5X. You can tell you have no experience in the business.
It is pretty simple, most f2p games have a lot less content that p2p games. They also have mechanisms to extend play with heavy grinding at higher levels, which of course can be lessened through the item shop. The f2p games can get by with a lot less development because the quest system usually disappears about mid leveling ranges.
Just look at the numbers presented for some recent launches.
Lets start with Destiny. They are spending 500M on the game, but development cost is estimated to be 60M.
Next, lets look at a mobile game. Game of War just spent 40M for a single ad campaign.
Marketing is the single largest cost for publishing a game. The advantage of F2P is lower CPA, which is based on marketing costs. The lower cost is what makes F2P feasible, and profitable.
Where did you get the idea that P2P games spend 5 to 10 times their development cost on marketing ? Lmao !
Destiny's budget for the next 10 years is supposed to be $500M, yes. But that includes all the development for expansions, DLC's, customer service and ongoing game support over the next 10 years.
Here's some numbers for you: 9 out of 10 game adverts on gaming sites are for F2P games. In fact, the only time that MMORPG.COM's front page frame ad is NOT for some F2P game is in the week or two around the launch of a P2P game.
F2P games spend far more than P2P/B2P games on marketing. They simply have to, because they need a constant stream of fresh customers to keep spending in the Cash Store. Most players slow down their spending after the first month or two (if they're even still playing that F2P game), because things like extra bag space and a fast mount are only required when you start playing. Once you have it, the rest is optional.
I believe it is growing. I have noticed a lot more people, at least on this site, speaking out against the F2P model that before. I believe more and more people are becoming disillusioned at the idea of playing for free. At best its a deliberately compromised experience.
You must have missed the F2P discussions 5 years ago. F2P is absolutely loved by all today in comparison. It used to be that you could not even talk about it here, because your inbox would be filled with spam/hatemail. Now there are people that like it, and people that dont... and both types post on these forums.
5 years ago? Sure, but since then, the pendulum shifted and now it is shifting back again.
Where did you get the idea that P2P games spend 5 to 10 times their development cost on marketing ? Lmao !
Destiny's budget for the next 10 years is supposed to be $500M, yes. But that includes all the development for expansions, DLC's, customer service and ongoing game support over the next 10 years.
Here's some numbers for you: 9 out of 10 game adverts on gaming sites are for F2P games. In fact, the only time that MMORPG.COM's front page frame ad is NOT for some F2P game is in the week or two around the launch of a P2P game.
F2P games spend far more than P2P/B2P games on marketing. They simply have to, because they need a constant stream of fresh customers to keep spending in the Cash Store. Most players slow down their spending after the first month or two (if they're even still playing that F2P game), because things like extra bag space and a fast mount are only required when you start playing. Once you have it, the rest is optional.
The cost of marketing P2P games is not something that people have hidden. You can find details about this in press releases, presentations, and other public information. Heck, if you look at the breakdown of cost from public companies, you can see this.
The Destiny 10 year budget does include things like DLC, but the vast majority of this is for marketing. You can even see some commentary about this from Activision when the 500M first came out.
Web advertising is fairly cheap (in comparison) to advertising in physical media, or traditional media (print, tv, radio, etc). F2P goes for the most cost effective returns (buying spends drop off as the conversion goes down). The best returns for any product is word of mouth, and that is where F2P excels.
F2P does not spend anywhere near as much as P2P on marketing. Just checkout the information about EA marketing... which has been ongoing for over a decade, with P2P, and you will see that it is a HUGE expense.
The single largest dropoff for both P2P and F2P is the first day. There is a huge attrition within the first three days (there are some recent threads about this). As for F2P spenders, in a MMORPG most do not even start spending until their third month. This is why F2P companies have started taking a P2P approach with Founders Packs, as this significantly decreases the time to spend.
You sure do have a penchant for writing as a budding game journalist.
Thank you for sharing your insights of the games industry in a meta sense. Besides keeping your column going here at Mmorpg.com. Its a good place to remain on stand-by until your next opportunity pans out.
This guy is seriously missing the point. The argument is NOT whether a P2W model is sustainable. Thats like arguing ( a bit attenuated ) that global warming IS indeed bad.. we all know it is. The question is whether our actions indeed are causing global warming.
Simiilarly, everyone knows P2W is not sustainable.. the topic hot button topic is What consitutes a P2W game? Or is this or is this NOT a P2W game. Saying that P2W games suck is merely a truism.
Thanks David "cpt. obvious" Georgson
Bad analogy. I can post stuff here until I am blue in the face about this one. The is next to no doubt about us causing global warming except in the media that is trying to sell advertising time. the number of scientists who concur on this issue is well over 95% I hope you know someone who had academic access because all the data I will post to back up my claims in in academic peer reviewed journals. So if you know a student or teacher they can get you access. Now by all means refute my claims but give me some peer reviewed sources to back up what you say.
So much truth being spoken in the replies in this thread.
I've noticed that P2P & F2P players don't really jive too well in the F2P games I've played.
One guy has no problem spending his disposable income on a game he enjoys while the other has made the decision to never spend a penny.
The p2p player makes sure to behave to protect his investment in a game while f2p player has no problem getting banned because he can just create a new account.
At the end of the day one guy is paying the bill for both because games would close w/o money.
Dunno if in the end it's good or bad but F2P is basically a welfare system for gaming.
Dunno if in the end it's good or bad but F2P is basically a welfare system for gaming.
Interesting that you should see it that way.
Other opinions differ, of course:
Originally posted by Rydeson
I look at this way.. F2P is "pay as you go".. It's like a users tax.. If you don't use the content, you are not paying for it.. Subscription is basically a "socialist" pay model where everyone pays the same rate, regardless if they use the content or not..
...
I suppose F2P is closer to the capitalist model in RL, because (like in RL) the rich mostly own the poor !
I believe it is growing. I have noticed a lot more people, at least on this site, speaking out against the F2P model that before. I believe more and more people are becoming disillusioned at the idea of playing for free. At best its a deliberately compromised experience.
You're just pulling an unsupported opinion out of thin air. Okay, that's your opinion. I think it's a fantasy.
What I see is more people complaining about paying for anything period. They complain about paying for something in a sub-free/optional game with a cash shop. They complain about a box fee. They complain about paying a subscription. I don't see any more people saying they hate paying for things in a cash shop but they would love to have a $15 monthly bill with a $50 box fee every year. Nope, I just see people bitching about having to pay for anything period.
The mantra usually goes something like the game is crap, all games are crap now, and they're not going to pay for it. People speak with their wallets and we haven't seen data, outside of the gorilla, that says people are abandoning sub-free games and flocking to to subscription locked games. Not only that, there really isn't a pure sub anymore except maybe a couple aging titles. Nearly every sub-locked game out now has a cash shop, dlc micro-transactions (box fee content), and/or RMT conversion. So you're just getting a F2P game with a mandatory sub.
By thin air, you mean paying attention? OK, it's hardly the overall feel for the community at large, but I think it's a bit more substantial than "unsupported" and "thin air".
And to your "People complainang about paying for anything".....I don't think you are really paying attention. Or maybe I'm not, Who knows
But what I am seeing is people saying they would rather pay for a sub than F2P cash shops.
F2P is a pariah that relies on whales to survive. With that being said, I have spent money on one F2P game and that's Marvel Heroes. I do have a lot of issues with their pricing but it is what it is. And frankly, they offer the best all around ARPG experience at the moment and that doesn't appear to be changing any time soon. Blizzard's in no rush to make D3 the best ARPG on the market, especially now that they have no auction house to boost income with. Marvel Heroes would be more enjoyable to me as a $9.99 a month game with access to everything and no cash shop. But that's never going to happen, which is why I'm keeping a close eye on Lineage Eternal.
F2P saved MMOs. I was there when SWTOR was dying, so deserted it was almost unplayable, and F2P saved that game. Future MMO devs would be fools not to make their games F2P from day one. Anyway...
Georgeson likes the simplicity of F2P games with paywalls. I hate paywalls inside F2P games. Like in DCUO for instance, you need to buy the DLCs. Why should I get my hero to max level... only to have to pay to play? Internal paywalls kill the illusion that you are investing your time as you play, and without that illusion, MMOs are pretty boring.
Paying for new content seems reasonable to me, especially if there's no sub fee. Now I have no idea how they implemented it in that game, but I see permanently unlocking content as legit in theory. Much more than what other games charge for.
Sorry you are all using the wrong terminology when it comes to just how this industry has been destroyed. It's not F2P as we've all seen from games like pre-romulan STO, Rift, and pre-mirkwood lotro, it is in fact Pay to Progress models that have broken this industry and yes you can have pay to progress inside of a subscription model.
Whether it's a clever auction house centric game disguised behind a clever currency conversion model where the developers get you to buy gold, or the direct purchase of a resource so essential that playing the game any other way is simply impossible due to developers nerfing the loot, pay to progress has become the standard norm in the mmo market. One can only hope that the console market will remain pure and force the hand of developers to go back to a time when farming wasn't a criminal act and when playing the game rather than buying the items became the norm.
Who do you blame for this problem? Yourselves. Because you let it happen. Ever since 2011 we tried to tell you that this was coming that there was a sharp left turn in the direction of the economics of these games but everyone either poopooed the idea or called us names. You have no one else to blame but yourselves!
The future is B2P. MMOS have a standing like just normal computer games right now, why not using the same pricing model. You will get new customers over the years meaning constant cashflow.
GW2 pricing model is superior to others right now. Combine that with some cosmetic add ons you can buy and everyone will be happy.
The developers don't want to create the best game possible (according to their skills, team size and whatnot) to attract players. Instead, they want to create a game that makes players unhappy or annoyed, so that they play money to get stuff in the game that fixes that. Example: bank space. It takes zero effort whatsoever from the developer to increase the bank space. Yet, in many games, they artificially restrict it, to annoy players, and make them pay money to increase it. They pay money not for content, or for the developers good work, or anything like that. They just pay it to get rid of an annoyance that was on purpose put into the game to make people pay.
The only f2p game I know that is not like this is DOTA2, because all players there are equal, no matter how much they spend.
Personally, I think box price plus DLC/expansions is probably the best way to go. I don't think developers like this though as it forces them to release content to get paid.
imagine if WoW didn't have a sub, but charged every time they release "significant" content. I doubt we would have seen that one year lull between updates we are so accustomed to.
many people equate subscriptions with quality and content. But often it seems the subs encourage lazy developers and repetitive content to keep them subbing. Ultimately, F2P, B2P, or P2P the end goal is to keep the customer paying.
F2p has killed AAA mmos. = in a bad way-their maintnance and updates are far in between. i dont blame them with their small staff.
B2p is ok= with purchasable DLC.
Sub is best = by a long shot! with alternate models.
I don't really agree that the F2P mmorpg killed the AAA mmorpg market. I think WoW killed that market in large part. Not necessarily through a fault of its own but a situation that arose due to WoW's general success... Growth patterns would show WoW to be a fluke in growth but many developers/publishers are not very realistic to begin with.
Gamer expectation has grown to expecting WoW level content (as far as amount up to the current expansion) and developers are thinking that by copying the same formulas over and over they are going to somehow pull another WoW and this is an ever increasing problem that permeates wide in the MMORPG genre, but is a problem with the gaming industry as a whole as of late. There is no enough experimentation and many game developers just take the easy and safe route.
Many games feel the same and there are many F2P games that do a very good job at giving content, maintenance, and general bug fixing so I find the general ascertation that they killed the triple AAA mmorpg a bit laughable. What we consider to be the AAA segment of the gaming industry as a whole is a laughable set of games as well. It is the same mundane crap over and over at this point. Ohh another shooter that doesn't really offer anything new, ohh another mmorpg that doesn't really offer anything new.
Hell good story, good character development, and lots of other things took a backseat to lazy multiplayer designs and graphics for a long time. In fact there were presentations at this years GDC that literally said story in a game is not important and that games only care about character development. The gaming industry as a whole is becoming a problem and if anything at least the F2P MMORPGs actually bring in companies that will try and experiment and try differing things instead of the whole "We need to keep this 100% safe" F2P didn't kill the triple A mmorpg the industry as a whole killed them in any game category.
The future is B2P. MMOS have a standing like just normal computer games right now, why not using the same pricing model. You will get new customers over the years meaning constant cashflow.
GW2 pricing model is superior to others right now. Combine that with some cosmetic add ons you can buy and everyone will be happy.
I hate to be the one to inform you of this but GW2 has a TP centric gold seller model cleverly disguised behind a currency conversion model. They've repeatedly nerfed all farming areas and consider legit farmers criminals and continue to spread the myth that DR on loot a draconian system known to have completely taken out whole gaming companies actually helps players and stops botting/chinese gold farmers, somehow helps players as a whole when it does nothing for the playerbase but repeatedly make loot disappear. They've just had yet another thread on this system causing whole chests to disappear from both boss runs open world and in dungeons again and another thread on the problems of whole unlucky accounts in which some people just never get anything of value to drop ever, two things that frequently happen when using DR scripting.
So Far Rift and Eve have been the only games I've experienced in which they don't manipulate the players and they have a clean billing model. For some reason though people keep being pulled in by the hypetrains of certain titles. Just because the game might be fun for those who like to spend alot doesn't mean you aren't being manipulated and your money taken from you by said manipulation remember that.
Also don't forget that pay to win and pay to progress models can and do exist in subscription and B2P games out there, it's just that people often ignore the truth if that game happens to be popular. No one wants to look like a chump so they won't admit that they supported such games.
The developers don't want to create the best game possible (according to their skills, team size and whatnot) to attract players. Instead, they want to create a game that makes players unhappy or annoyed, so that they play money to get stuff in the game that fixes that. Example: bank space. It takes zero effort whatsoever from the developer to increase the bank space. Yet, in many games, they artificially restrict it, to annoy players, and make them pay money to increase it. They pay money not for content, or for the developers good work, or anything like that. They just pay it to get rid of an annoyance that was on purpose put into the game to make people pay.
The only f2p game I know that is not like this is DOTA2, because all players there are equal, no matter how much they spend.
DOTA2 is also not a MMORPG, and so doesn't have to deal with all the things a MMORPG dev does.
As for the F2P thing, you are spot on. That's exactly what they do. They design the entire game around the idea of trying to entice and encourage people to use the cash shop as much as possible..
Inventory space is one great example. Give them very limited bank space, and then throw a ton of crap at them to carry around (quest items, potions, gift boxes which produce even more items, etc) so they have to either keep emptying their bags, or constantly limit what they pick up. The idea being... they'll get annoyed enough, want to buy a bit more "time" on having to deal with inventory limits, and pay to expand it.
Another is the time to level up, etc. They will make the earlier levels fast/easy, with lots of potions and freebies thrown your way, to get you invested in the game (as a player, not monetarily necessarily), and get you used to having HP and MP pots always on hand-etc. Then, at some point, when they figure they've got ya, they start to ween you off that stuff... the potions become less frequent and/or less potent... etc. Meanwhile, the mobs become tougher to kill, and the xp slows down. Looks like a great reason to buy those XP Strength boosters from the Cash Shop! Might as well throw in some of those Cash-Shop Exclusive HP and MP potions while you're at it - they're much better than the in-game versions, you can't get them any other way, and those mobs are getting tougher!
And thus those nickels and dimes add up... especially on the consumables.
That's the whole thing... design inconvenience and speedbumps into the game... then sell the "solutions" on the cash shop.
Someone once said on here, and I can't remember who, or the exact quote, but they were spot on:
It went something like this:
"All one has to do is take a step back to see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt".
F2P/Cash Shops in a nutshell.
And that doesn't even get into the other crap they pull, like obfuscating the amount people are actually spending by hiding it behind a "cash shop currency" system... or staggering the cost of items to always fall in-between the amounts you can buy at a time... so you almost always have to buy more than you need, and almost always need more than you have.... It goes on and on.
"I don’t personally have anything against pay-to-win games." Dave Georgeson
I think it fundamental that the integrity and immersion of an alternate world be preserved and buying in game items and gold and cash shops let alone straight up Pay 2 Win completely and utterly destroy any reason for me to play the game.
You quoted Dave out of context.
The full quote states that he has no problem with P2W games, provided they are upfront and perfectly clear about their model. And there I agree with him (even though I disagree with many of his other points).
My beef with F2P is that it is primarily built on manipulation and deception. The monetization schemes are deliberately obscure and hidden under layers of obfuscation. All the weaknesses and foibles of human nature are ruthlessly exploited. It will inevitably influence the game play, itemization and drop rates in any game.
You just prooved that old school P2P games had extreme time sinks/grinds just so players pay 15/month longer and no other reason. It uses same principle as F2P games, sorry to burst your bubble.
It was aslo much worse in old school games because there was no option to pay OR invest extreme time in it you HAD to do both.
The majority of that extreme time investment was all about raiding, which was just as niche a play style then as it is now. Other than certain parts of epic quests, the rest of the game could be done in small chunks just like modern games.
The developers don't want to create the best game possible (according to their skills, team size and whatnot) to attract players. Instead, they want to create a game that makes players unhappy or annoyed, so that they play money to get stuff in the game that fixes that. Example: bank space. It takes zero effort whatsoever from the developer to increase the bank space. Yet, in many games, they artificially restrict it, to annoy players, and make them pay money to increase it. They pay money not for content, or for the developers good work, or anything like that. They just pay it to get rid of an annoyance that was on purpose put into the game to make people pay.
The only f2p game I know that is not like this is DOTA2, because all players there are equal, no matter how much they spend.
DOTA2 is also not a MMORPG, and so doesn't have to deal with all the things a MMORPG dev does.
As for the F2P thing, you are spot on. That's exactly what they do. They design the entire game around the idea of trying to entice and encourage people to use the cash shop as much as possible..
Inventory space is one great example. Give them very limited bank space, and then throw a ton of crap at them to carry around (quest items, potions, gift boxes which produce even more items, etc) so they have to either keep emptying their bags, or constantly limit what they pick up. The idea being... they'll get annoyed enough, want to buy a bit more "time" on having to deal with inventory limits, and pay to expand it.
Another is the time to level up, etc. They will make the earlier levels fast/easy, with lots of potions and freebies thrown your way, to get you invested in the game (as a player, not monetarily necessarily), and get you used to having HP and MP pots always on hand-etc. Then, at some point, when they figure they've got ya, they start to ween you off that stuff... the potions become less frequent and/or less potent... etc. Meanwhile, the mobs become tougher to kill, and the xp slows down. Looks like a great reason to buy those XP Strength boosters from the Cash Shop! Might as well throw in some of those Cash-Shop Exclusive HP and MP potions while you're at it - they're much better than the in-game versions, you can't get them any other way, and those mobs are getting tougher!
And thus those nickels and dimes add up... especially on the consumables.
That's the whole thing... design inconvenience and speedbumps into the game... then sell the "solutions" on the cash shop.
Someone once said on here, and I can't remember who, or the exact quote, but they were spot on:
It went something like this:
"All one has to do is take a step back to see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt".
F2P/Cash Shops in a nutshell.
And that doesn't even get into the other crap they pull, like obfuscating the amount people are actually spending by hiding it behind a "cash shop currency" system... or staggering the cost of items to always fall in-between the amounts you can buy at a time... so you almost always have to buy more than you need, and almost always need more than you have.... It goes on and on.
I think entice is the wrong word to use. When I play F2P games, I feel punished if not buying and using XP potions or buying bag space or extra hot bars. I feel left out if I don't pay for the new classes or ships or faster mounts that are only available via the cash shop. I wouldn't be so upset in buying them if they didn't add up to be so much more expensive than a subscription would have been. After all, it only makes sense to make certain aspects of the game more punishing in order to make the cash shop more rewarding to use and to justify the cost of those items. We all know that fluff shops only last so long, then they HAVE to add necessary things like UI improvements, better mounts, exclusive classes / ships, XP bonuses, stat bonuses...etc in order to make the shop viable. Which is bad enough in itself, but when you look at most F2P shops and what they charge for these things, it's beyond ridiculous.
That doesn't even include the usual argument that new content takes the back seat in comparison to new cash shop items each month.
Why im not surprised this article is on mmorpg.com?
Thank you for telling us that F2p is great, is the future and if we dont like we just dont understand.
Also thank you for trying to shove it down our throats I.E "f2p is great, no go play some f2p games and spend some $$$ in them".
most of us that has been here for a while have noticed how mmorpg.com push and hype games... even though most of them end up a flop.
there is so much BS on that article its horrid.
NO, we dont want your F2p games, NO we dont want to be treated as cash cows, NO we dont to hit pay-well in every other corner of the game, NO we dont microtransactions in every place you can think about it (swtor pay for bars, and Gw2 which is b2p and you still need to pay for the expansion but the entire game revolve around the AH and the frigging gems)
Game devlopers today treat mmorpg as mobile games, just try to cash in as much you can and treat you customer as a dumb sucker that if you put a pay-well in front of them (I.E candycrash and farmfarmville ) we will always click and spend some more cash on your so called game.
F2p is the cancer of gaming, and not just mmorpg. its treating games not like games, just a cash machine designed from the get go to milk as much as you can from the poor saps before you move on to a different game (the customers and the company). just take Hi-rez as a good example for that , they develop a game, hype it, and then leave it on life support and move on. (global agenda , tribes).
the reason less people are playing mmorpgs today is not because we are old and tired, its because in single players game the level of this Bs is much lower, and you dont hit that frigging pay-well every other second you play, and you feel like a 2nd hand player unless you shill enough $$ on the game.
Frak f2p, Frak microtransactions, Frak pay-wells, and most of all, fark all those pricks in the industry that keep trying to get us to "embrace" that load of crap.
Edit: the only game i can think of that done f2p right is Dota2. you pay for cosmetics, nothing else (and even dota2 starting looking how to milk more from us with the latest event...).
I 3930k -- Rampage IV Extreme -- G.skill RipjawsZ 32 GB -- Corsair Force Series 3 120gb -- G.skill Phoenix Pro 60gb -- WD 1 TB Black -- Corsair H 100 -- Thermaltake Level 10 Gt Snow Edition -- Corsair AX1200 -- Asus 560 Ti Sli -- Microsoft Sidewinder X4 -- Logitech G5 -- DELL UltraSharp 2007FP -- Samsung Syncmaster Sa700 -- Logitech Z2300 -- Logitech G35 -- Logitech G600 White -- coming soon : Dell U2711.
So in general, there’s not much of a reason to fear pay-to-win suddenly being introduced into your existing game because it’s a really bad business move and the clever in the industry won’t do it to you.
Most of the article was sound logic, but this sentence this is where you are wrong.
Maybe having sat on the inside for so long have made you blind, but from the outside as a gamer, bad decisions are made by all devs in the industry.. and that goes especially for SoE. So fearing bad decisions from a dev is a very real thing for gamers, and there is no such thing as a company we trust - The only way to build trust is to close the doors that invite bad decisions.
Such a door could be seeing a game that obviously have no other income but buying ingame items, currency.. it may not be strictly pay to win, but it is darn close and one wrong update (decision) could change everything. Other f2p models may not show that kind of dependency on p2w stuff, and you should not underestimate how smart gamers are.. most can apply logic and see what a game intend to make money on - And if this explanation is not logic ("we can run and develop a game and it's completely free for everyone"), they wont trust you.
Then there are all the other bad decisions regarding the game and gameplay itself. The point is we expect devs to make bad decisions because it happens every day, and not only bad decisions from a gamers perspective but also decisions that obviously alienates the game's core players (and paying customers).
Comments
Where did you get the idea that P2P games spend 5 to 10 times their development cost on marketing ? Lmao !
Destiny's budget for the next 10 years is supposed to be $500M, yes. But that includes all the development for expansions, DLC's, customer service and ongoing game support over the next 10 years.
Here's some numbers for you: 9 out of 10 game adverts on gaming sites are for F2P games. In fact, the only time that MMORPG.COM's front page frame ad is NOT for some F2P game is in the week or two around the launch of a P2P game.
F2P games spend far more than P2P/B2P games on marketing. They simply have to, because they need a constant stream of fresh customers to keep spending in the Cash Store. Most players slow down their spending after the first month or two (if they're even still playing that F2P game), because things like extra bag space and a fast mount are only required when you start playing. Once you have it, the rest is optional.
5 years ago? Sure, but since then, the pendulum shifted and now it is shifting back again.
The cost of marketing P2P games is not something that people have hidden. You can find details about this in press releases, presentations, and other public information. Heck, if you look at the breakdown of cost from public companies, you can see this.
The Destiny 10 year budget does include things like DLC, but the vast majority of this is for marketing. You can even see some commentary about this from Activision when the 500M first came out.
Web advertising is fairly cheap (in comparison) to advertising in physical media, or traditional media (print, tv, radio, etc). F2P goes for the most cost effective returns (buying spends drop off as the conversion goes down). The best returns for any product is word of mouth, and that is where F2P excels.
F2P does not spend anywhere near as much as P2P on marketing. Just checkout the information about EA marketing... which has been ongoing for over a decade, with P2P, and you will see that it is a HUGE expense.
The single largest dropoff for both P2P and F2P is the first day. There is a huge attrition within the first three days (there are some recent threads about this). As for F2P spenders, in a MMORPG most do not even start spending until their third month. This is why F2P companies have started taking a P2P approach with Founders Packs, as this significantly decreases the time to spend.
add in cons: now all mmorpg are crap because of f2p game
was loving pay to play mmorpg now everything who release are not even done or finish, in beta or alpha and you still gotta pay for it...
people used to stick with the game they have create and update it with patch ect
now they release, f2p or p2p or not, cash in the most they can, switch f2p and remake another one... fuck that you
and that not because im old now, if you tell me that im realy going to get mad !!!, they just release crap !!!
I see your enjoying your sabbatical Dave.
You sure do have a penchant for writing as a budding game journalist.
Thank you for sharing your insights of the games industry in a meta sense. Besides keeping your column going here at Mmorpg.com. Its a good place to remain on stand-by until your next opportunity pans out.
----------------------
The Older Gamers
Bad analogy. I can post stuff here until I am blue in the face about this one. The is next to no doubt about us causing global warming except in the media that is trying to sell advertising time. the number of scientists who concur on this issue is well over 95% I hope you know someone who had academic access because all the data I will post to back up my claims in in academic peer reviewed journals. So if you know a student or teacher they can get you access. Now by all means refute my claims but give me some peer reviewed sources to back up what you say.
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.libdb.ppcc.edu/ehost/detail/detail?sid=7dabdc38-1a87-4fa3-bbb5-0ad11bd8a83b@sessionmgr113&vid=0&hid=118&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#db=a9h&AN=62030530
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.libdb.ppcc.edu/ehost/detail/detail?sid=a5006691-46dc-4cb8-ae12-b8fc181c2e4d@sessionmgr112&vid=0&hid=118&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#db=a9h&AN=97618645
So much truth being spoken in the replies in this thread.
I've noticed that P2P & F2P players don't really jive too well in the F2P games I've played.
One guy has no problem spending his disposable income on a game he enjoys while the other has made the decision to never spend a penny.
The p2p player makes sure to behave to protect his investment in a game while f2p player has no problem getting banned because he can just create a new account.
At the end of the day one guy is paying the bill for both because games would close w/o money.
Dunno if in the end it's good or bad but F2P is basically a welfare system for gaming.
Interesting that you should see it that way.
Other opinions differ, of course:
I suppose F2P is closer to the capitalist model in RL, because (like in RL) the rich mostly own the poor !
By thin air, you mean paying attention? OK, it's hardly the overall feel for the community at large, but I think it's a bit more substantial than "unsupported" and "thin air".
And to your "People complainang about paying for anything".....I don't think you are really paying attention. Or maybe I'm not, Who knows
But what I am seeing is people saying they would rather pay for a sub than F2P cash shops.
Paying for new content seems reasonable to me, especially if there's no sub fee. Now I have no idea how they implemented it in that game, but I see permanently unlocking content as legit in theory. Much more than what other games charge for.
Sorry you are all using the wrong terminology when it comes to just how this industry has been destroyed. It's not F2P as we've all seen from games like pre-romulan STO, Rift, and pre-mirkwood lotro, it is in fact Pay to Progress models that have broken this industry and yes you can have pay to progress inside of a subscription model.
Whether it's a clever auction house centric game disguised behind a clever currency conversion model where the developers get you to buy gold, or the direct purchase of a resource so essential that playing the game any other way is simply impossible due to developers nerfing the loot, pay to progress has become the standard norm in the mmo market. One can only hope that the console market will remain pure and force the hand of developers to go back to a time when farming wasn't a criminal act and when playing the game rather than buying the items became the norm.
Who do you blame for this problem? Yourselves. Because you let it happen. Ever since 2011 we tried to tell you that this was coming that there was a sharp left turn in the direction of the economics of these games but everyone either poopooed the idea or called us names. You have no one else to blame but yourselves!
The future is B2P. MMOS have a standing like just normal computer games right now, why not using the same pricing model. You will get new customers over the years meaning constant cashflow.
GW2 pricing model is superior to others right now. Combine that with some cosmetic add ons you can buy and everyone will be happy.
The main reason why I don't like f2p games:
The developers don't want to create the best game possible (according to their skills, team size and whatnot) to attract players. Instead, they want to create a game that makes players unhappy or annoyed, so that they play money to get stuff in the game that fixes that. Example: bank space. It takes zero effort whatsoever from the developer to increase the bank space. Yet, in many games, they artificially restrict it, to annoy players, and make them pay money to increase it. They pay money not for content, or for the developers good work, or anything like that. They just pay it to get rid of an annoyance that was on purpose put into the game to make people pay.
The only f2p game I know that is not like this is DOTA2, because all players there are equal, no matter how much they spend.
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
Personally, I think box price plus DLC/expansions is probably the best way to go. I don't think developers like this though as it forces them to release content to get paid.
imagine if WoW didn't have a sub, but charged every time they release "significant" content. I doubt we would have seen that one year lull between updates we are so accustomed to.
many people equate subscriptions with quality and content. But often it seems the subs encourage lazy developers and repetitive content to keep them subbing. Ultimately, F2P, B2P, or P2P the end goal is to keep the customer paying.
I don't really agree that the F2P mmorpg killed the AAA mmorpg market. I think WoW killed that market in large part. Not necessarily through a fault of its own but a situation that arose due to WoW's general success... Growth patterns would show WoW to be a fluke in growth but many developers/publishers are not very realistic to begin with.
Gamer expectation has grown to expecting WoW level content (as far as amount up to the current expansion) and developers are thinking that by copying the same formulas over and over they are going to somehow pull another WoW and this is an ever increasing problem that permeates wide in the MMORPG genre, but is a problem with the gaming industry as a whole as of late. There is no enough experimentation and many game developers just take the easy and safe route.
Many games feel the same and there are many F2P games that do a very good job at giving content, maintenance, and general bug fixing so I find the general ascertation that they killed the triple AAA mmorpg a bit laughable. What we consider to be the AAA segment of the gaming industry as a whole is a laughable set of games as well. It is the same mundane crap over and over at this point. Ohh another shooter that doesn't really offer anything new, ohh another mmorpg that doesn't really offer anything new.
Hell good story, good character development, and lots of other things took a backseat to lazy multiplayer designs and graphics for a long time. In fact there were presentations at this years GDC that literally said story in a game is not important and that games only care about character development. The gaming industry as a whole is becoming a problem and if anything at least the F2P MMORPGs actually bring in companies that will try and experiment and try differing things instead of the whole "We need to keep this 100% safe" F2P didn't kill the triple A mmorpg the industry as a whole killed them in any game category.
I hate to be the one to inform you of this but GW2 has a TP centric gold seller model cleverly disguised behind a currency conversion model. They've repeatedly nerfed all farming areas and consider legit farmers criminals and continue to spread the myth that DR on loot a draconian system known to have completely taken out whole gaming companies actually helps players and stops botting/chinese gold farmers, somehow helps players as a whole when it does nothing for the playerbase but repeatedly make loot disappear. They've just had yet another thread on this system causing whole chests to disappear from both boss runs open world and in dungeons again and another thread on the problems of whole unlucky accounts in which some people just never get anything of value to drop ever, two things that frequently happen when using DR scripting.
So Far Rift and Eve have been the only games I've experienced in which they don't manipulate the players and they have a clean billing model. For some reason though people keep being pulled in by the hypetrains of certain titles. Just because the game might be fun for those who like to spend alot doesn't mean you aren't being manipulated and your money taken from you by said manipulation remember that.
Also don't forget that pay to win and pay to progress models can and do exist in subscription and B2P games out there, it's just that people often ignore the truth if that game happens to be popular. No one wants to look like a chump so they won't admit that they supported such games.
DOTA2 is also not a MMORPG, and so doesn't have to deal with all the things a MMORPG dev does.
As for the F2P thing, you are spot on. That's exactly what they do. They design the entire game around the idea of trying to entice and encourage people to use the cash shop as much as possible..
Inventory space is one great example. Give them very limited bank space, and then throw a ton of crap at them to carry around (quest items, potions, gift boxes which produce even more items, etc) so they have to either keep emptying their bags, or constantly limit what they pick up. The idea being... they'll get annoyed enough, want to buy a bit more "time" on having to deal with inventory limits, and pay to expand it.
Another is the time to level up, etc. They will make the earlier levels fast/easy, with lots of potions and freebies thrown your way, to get you invested in the game (as a player, not monetarily necessarily), and get you used to having HP and MP pots always on hand-etc. Then, at some point, when they figure they've got ya, they start to ween you off that stuff... the potions become less frequent and/or less potent... etc. Meanwhile, the mobs become tougher to kill, and the xp slows down. Looks like a great reason to buy those XP Strength boosters from the Cash Shop! Might as well throw in some of those Cash-Shop Exclusive HP and MP potions while you're at it - they're much better than the in-game versions, you can't get them any other way, and those mobs are getting tougher!
And thus those nickels and dimes add up... especially on the consumables.
That's the whole thing... design inconvenience and speedbumps into the game... then sell the "solutions" on the cash shop.
Someone once said on here, and I can't remember who, or the exact quote, but they were spot on:
It went something like this:
"All one has to do is take a step back to see all the pot holes in the road, and the cash shop selling asphalt".
F2P/Cash Shops in a nutshell.
And that doesn't even get into the other crap they pull, like obfuscating the amount people are actually spending by hiding it behind a "cash shop currency" system... or staggering the cost of items to always fall in-between the amounts you can buy at a time... so you almost always have to buy more than you need, and almost always need more than you have.... It goes on and on.
The majority of that extreme time investment was all about raiding, which was just as niche a play style then as it is now. Other than certain parts of epic quests, the rest of the game could be done in small chunks just like modern games.
I think entice is the wrong word to use. When I play F2P games, I feel punished if not buying and using XP potions or buying bag space or extra hot bars. I feel left out if I don't pay for the new classes or ships or faster mounts that are only available via the cash shop. I wouldn't be so upset in buying them if they didn't add up to be so much more expensive than a subscription would have been. After all, it only makes sense to make certain aspects of the game more punishing in order to make the cash shop more rewarding to use and to justify the cost of those items. We all know that fluff shops only last so long, then they HAVE to add necessary things like UI improvements, better mounts, exclusive classes / ships, XP bonuses, stat bonuses...etc in order to make the shop viable. Which is bad enough in itself, but when you look at most F2P shops and what they charge for these things, it's beyond ridiculous.
That doesn't even include the usual argument that new content takes the back seat in comparison to new cash shop items each month.
Why im not surprised this article is on mmorpg.com?
Thank you for telling us that F2p is great, is the future and if we dont like we just dont understand.
Also thank you for trying to shove it down our throats I.E "f2p is great, no go play some f2p games and spend some $$$ in them".
most of us that has been here for a while have noticed how mmorpg.com push and hype games... even though most of them end up a flop.
there is so much BS on that article its horrid.
NO, we dont want your F2p games, NO we dont want to be treated as cash cows, NO we dont to hit pay-well in every other corner of the game, NO we dont microtransactions in every place you can think about it (swtor pay for bars, and Gw2 which is b2p and you still need to pay for the expansion but the entire game revolve around the AH and the frigging gems)
Game devlopers today treat mmorpg as mobile games, just try to cash in as much you can and treat you customer as a dumb sucker that if you put a pay-well in front of them (I.E candycrash and farmfarmville ) we will always click and spend some more cash on your so called game.
F2p is the cancer of gaming, and not just mmorpg. its treating games not like games, just a cash machine designed from the get go to milk as much as you can from the poor saps before you move on to a different game (the customers and the company). just take Hi-rez as a good example for that , they develop a game, hype it, and then leave it on life support and move on. (global agenda , tribes).
the reason less people are playing mmorpgs today is not because we are old and tired, its because in single players game the level of this Bs is much lower, and you dont hit that frigging pay-well every other second you play, and you feel like a 2nd hand player unless you shill enough $$ on the game.
Frak f2p, Frak microtransactions, Frak pay-wells, and most of all, fark all those pricks in the industry that keep trying to get us to "embrace" that load of crap.
Edit: the only game i can think of that done f2p right is Dota2. you pay for cosmetics, nothing else (and even dota2 starting looking how to milk more from us with the latest event...).
I 3930k -- Rampage IV Extreme -- G.skill RipjawsZ 32 GB -- Corsair Force Series 3 120gb -- G.skill Phoenix Pro 60gb -- WD 1 TB Black -- Corsair H 100 -- Thermaltake Level 10 Gt Snow Edition -- Corsair AX1200 -- Asus 560 Ti Sli -- Microsoft Sidewinder X4 -- Logitech G5 -- DELL UltraSharp 2007FP -- Samsung Syncmaster Sa700 -- Logitech Z2300 -- Logitech G35 -- Logitech G600 White -- coming soon : Dell U2711.
So in general, there’s not much of a reason to fear pay-to-win suddenly being introduced into your existing game because it’s a really bad business move and the clever in the industry won’t do it to you.
Most of the article was sound logic, but this sentence this is where you are wrong.
Maybe having sat on the inside for so long have made you blind, but from the outside as a gamer, bad decisions are made by all devs in the industry.. and that goes especially for SoE. So fearing bad decisions from a dev is a very real thing for gamers, and there is no such thing as a company we trust - The only way to build trust is to close the doors that invite bad decisions.
Such a door could be seeing a game that obviously have no other income but buying ingame items, currency.. it may not be strictly pay to win, but it is darn close and one wrong update (decision) could change everything. Other f2p models may not show that kind of dependency on p2w stuff, and you should not underestimate how smart gamers are.. most can apply logic and see what a game intend to make money on - And if this explanation is not logic ("we can run and develop a game and it's completely free for everyone"), they wont trust you.
Then there are all the other bad decisions regarding the game and gameplay itself. The point is we expect devs to make bad decisions because it happens every day, and not only bad decisions from a gamers perspective but also decisions that obviously alienates the game's core players (and paying customers).
"I am my connectome" https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HA7GwKXfJB0