The general consensus here is to stop making crap games that need to be F2P.
I couldn't agree more. I have no problem paying a sub for a good game. I've been paying a sub for EVE Online for 12 years. No other game has been that good.
I am more than willing to buy a game and/or pay a subscription to any game I feel deserves it. However cash shops (sometimes even in sub games) hugely discourage me because every time a bug doesn't get fixed or new content is slow, all I think about is the time and development cost spent on the game's shop.
Most people have played a game at some point that had an update every week to the cash shop but hasn't had a content/balance/bug fix patch in months I'm guessing; I know I have played many.
Plenty of media outlets were proclaiming the death of sub games a few years back. Developers more or less gave up on the idea (IMO) to chase easier profits in the F2P/freemium market. Archeage is a great example of a game that could have been truly amazing as a purely sub game, but developer greed and Trion's lies destroyed it.
I don't personally think that an MMO can thrive as a F2P without creating a player rift via the shop. If you try to do purely cosmetics then they either look better than gear you can grind or they don't, either way somebody is discouraged to invest time/money. Besides, how many hats can one player possibly need?
Short answer: go back to P2P, or B2P and spend all of your resources trying to make something truly interesting to players.
Stop trying to reinvent the same exact game (which is currently happening thankfully) and stop developing around the concept of monetization. If developers don't make a compelling game to begin with, no monetization scheme is going to save it.
Make a product of such quality that it will generate demand with an actual price tag. That would be the best solution, I think.
Quality alone is not enough anymore due to sheer amount of new games that get released.
And I am talking all games - when Fallout 4 and Witcher 3 released many MMO players took a leave and played those.
Heck when Overwatch released steam playerbase dipped by 2 million players - that has never happened before.
The problem remains masses jumping from one game to another every 2-6 weeks *regardless* of quality.
What works is massive marketing push to boost initial sales - example Destiny and Overwatch.
But grownin the playerbase from initial launch over the span of months and years is problem that remains unsolved in a MMO gaming
MMORPGs suffer from both quality and quantity problem.
Quality wise - questing in MMORPGs is still very simplistic "go towards NPC with ? mark, follow the arrow and kill X enemies", Mob scripting is still very poor, difficulty curve in open world very low and adjusted in such way that leave veteran or average+ gamer bored to tears, presentation is weak(i.e. compare to The Witcher 3), suspension of disbelief hard to achieve, etc
At the same time - even biggest MMORPGs like TESO, WoW, Swtor, have very long content droughts, long time to fix exploits, etc
tl;dr - Problem is both with quantity - too small amount of content being delivered over time and quality big % of content being very simplistic which only make players streamroll through it on fast forward - not reading descriptions, skipping through dialogue, fast forward through significant % of dungeons aside of "hardcore" or raid ones.
Why would player stay in an MMORPG once he/she extinguishes majority of content (which is usually easy both from time and difficulty perspective) while he/she is not interested in so called "serious raiding".
Players are not a problem - problem is that industry is unable to provide what players need to stay. Even if this inabilty comes from objective financial, conceptual or/and technological limitations.
In F2P or Freemium games, I recognise the need for free players to bolster the population, but I also recognise the need to reward those players who actually fund the game.
If I pay towards a game I want a tangibly improved experience over those who do not. If I do not receive a tangibly improved experience then there is no incentive for me to pay for the game.
However, I do not want to see limitless advantages, or excessive time-walls or fail-states that can be overcome, depending upon the size of a player's wallet, because this unbalances the game, often to the point that the endgame becomes untenable for free players, or those who spend a moderate "subscription substitute".
This monetisation system disenfranchises all but the whales.
It also tends to prey on those with poor impulse control. To me, the best examples of bad, intrusive or morally ambiguous monetisation systems are those utilised by PWE.
So my question is, how do you incentivise players to pay for a game, without disenfranchising all but the whales?
with a business model that relies on barely less than one percent of the userbase to actually spend money ingame, what do you suggest they do? I hate p2w and whale friendly business model but sadly it has proben to be profitable.Loke666 said:
By delivering a product entertaining enough for the F2P players to be happy to support it and get something extra for it that doesn't have to give them advantage, just a recognition to the community they are supporting the game.
Well said, but there is a difference between advantage and upsetting the games balance. More bankspace is a good example of that, it is an advantage to have but it doesn't actually impact anything in the game unless you have a crappy system that forces people to store a zillion crafting mats or other junk there.
Bankspace, bag space to some degree (but not too much difference with them, from 60 to 100 is acceptable but not from 20 to 100), character slots, hairstyle kits are all fine.
Races only work if they are just cosmetic (and that is rather lazy). Classes is way out, as well as rangerpets or mounts that aren't just cosmetic.
And of course skins for anything is fine as well as long as they don't outshine the top tiered gear.
that is really assuming devs actually care about their product other than making sure there is cash flow.Jean-Luc_Picard said:
Don't try to screw the players with a pay to win cash shop, and they will happily support your game. Like GW2 and BDO for instance.
R2 games and the asian f2p market says hi, sadly their p2w approaches worked on their end
then again browser games are likely a completely different things anyway.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Simply put the developers need to find their core game loop. Basically what the player is expected to log on for, get the feedback for, and want to repeat. In a World of Everclone game this would be leveling and gearing up your character for most of the player base.
If you monetize that core game loop you're going to leave a sour taste in the free players(especially for larget advantages), and for paying players it won't feel great either(you'll either see it as a dumb manipulation maybe quiting for it, or it'll be an item so common even dolphin/minnows has it).
You need to actually capture your income from the other smaller game play loops of your game. If aesthetics aren't a big part of your game monetize that, if crafting/story/dueling/whatever isn't your core loop monetize that.
Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.
"At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."
Step 1: Make a good quality game with plenty of depth and social systems
Step 2: Make the core gameplay completely free and unrestricted
Step 3: Charge for content
Whales may have the money to waste of frivolous things from a cash shop, but the majority of players just want value for money. Paying £10 for a mount, £5 for a cosmetic outfit, £5 to unlock bankspace / chat etc....these are not value for money which is why most people don't bother. Not only that, but many games lock core features behind paywalls which diminish the free experience, putting off potential players.
I'm of the opinion that is you make all the gameplay free so that users can experience the full gameplay systems in place, then you can get them hooked. So, full chat, full guild systems, full auction house, all toolbars etc.....you need to get your free players to fall in love with the game and fully enjoy their free time.
Then, gate content behind the cash shop.
So, give them perhaps the first 20 levels worth of content for free, then lock it down. Players then have to pay for new zones / instances / pvp etc. Assuming the prices are reasonable, people will pay for it. This is essentially a combination of endless free-trial with DLC model.
This puts players in charge of how and when they spend their money (which was supposed to be the point of f2p). If they can only game for 5 hours a month then sub isn't worth it, but spending £5 on a new zone which might take them 2 months to worth through on their own timescale would feel like value for money to them. They never feel forced to buy anything other than the sort of content they want to play, so if they aren't a pvper, they never have to pay to unlock pvp zones / battlegrounds. Not a raider, don't bother buying the raids.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr7X Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr4X Shaman
Comments
I couldn't agree more. I have no problem paying a sub for a good game. I've been paying a sub for EVE Online for 12 years. No other game has been that good.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
Most people have played a game at some point that had an update every week to the cash shop but hasn't had a content/balance/bug fix patch in months I'm guessing; I know I have played many.
Plenty of media outlets were proclaiming the death of sub games a few years back. Developers more or less gave up on the idea (IMO) to chase easier profits in the F2P/freemium market. Archeage is a great example of a game that could have been truly amazing as a purely sub game, but developer greed and Trion's lies destroyed it.
I don't personally think that an MMO can thrive as a F2P without creating a player rift via the shop. If you try to do purely cosmetics then they either look better than gear you can grind or they don't, either way somebody is discouraged to invest time/money. Besides, how many hats can one player possibly need?
Short answer: go back to P2P, or B2P and spend all of your resources trying to make something truly interesting to players.
Stop trying to reinvent the same exact game (which is currently happening thankfully) and stop developing around the concept of monetization. If developers don't make a compelling game to begin with, no monetization scheme is going to save it.
In an MMORPG it is impossible to do
MMORPGs suffer from both quality and quantity problem.
Quality wise - questing in MMORPGs is still very simplistic "go towards NPC with ? mark, follow the arrow and kill X enemies", Mob scripting is still very poor, difficulty curve in open world very low and adjusted in such way that leave veteran or average+ gamer bored to tears, presentation is weak(i.e. compare to The Witcher 3), suspension of disbelief hard to achieve, etc
At the same time - even biggest MMORPGs like TESO, WoW, Swtor, have very long content droughts, long time to fix exploits, etc
tl;dr - Problem is both with quantity - too small amount of content being delivered over time and quality big % of content being very simplistic which only make players streamroll through it on fast forward - not reading descriptions, skipping through dialogue, fast forward through significant % of dungeons aside of "hardcore" or raid ones.
Why would player stay in an MMORPG once he/she extinguishes majority of content (which is usually easy both from time and difficulty perspective) while he/she is not interested in so called "serious raiding".
Players are not a problem - problem is that industry is unable to provide what players need to stay. Even if this inabilty comes from objective financial, conceptual or/and technological limitations.
with a business model that relies on barely less than one percent of the userbase to actually spend money ingame, what do you suggest they do? I hate p2w and whale friendly business model but sadly it has proben to be profitable.Loke666 said: that is really assuming devs actually care about their product other than making sure there is cash flow.Jean-Luc_Picard said: R2 games and the asian f2p market says hi, sadly their p2w approaches worked on their end
then again browser games are likely a completely different things anyway.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
If you monetize that core game loop you're going to leave a sour taste in the free players(especially for larget advantages), and for paying players it won't feel great either(you'll either see it as a dumb manipulation maybe quiting for it, or it'll be an item so common even dolphin/minnows has it).
You need to actually capture your income from the other smaller game play loops of your game. If aesthetics aren't a big part of your game monetize that, if crafting/story/dueling/whatever isn't your core loop monetize that.
Practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes permanent.
"At one point technology meant making tech that could get to the moon, now it means making tech that could get you a taxi."
- RPG Quiz - can you get all 25 right?
- FPS Quiz - how well do you know your shooters?
Step 2: Make the core gameplay completely free and unrestricted
Step 3: Charge for content
Whales may have the money to waste of frivolous things from a cash shop, but the majority of players just want value for money. Paying £10 for a mount, £5 for a cosmetic outfit, £5 to unlock bankspace / chat etc....these are not value for money which is why most people don't bother. Not only that, but many games lock core features behind paywalls which diminish the free experience, putting off potential players.
I'm of the opinion that is you make all the gameplay free so that users can experience the full gameplay systems in place, then you can get them hooked. So, full chat, full guild systems, full auction house, all toolbars etc.....you need to get your free players to fall in love with the game and fully enjoy their free time.
Then, gate content behind the cash shop.
So, give them perhaps the first 20 levels worth of content for free, then lock it down. Players then have to pay for new zones / instances / pvp etc. Assuming the prices are reasonable, people will pay for it. This is essentially a combination of endless free-trial with DLC model.
This puts players in charge of how and when they spend their money (which was supposed to be the point of f2p). If they can only game for 5 hours a month then sub isn't worth it, but spending £5 on a new zone which might take them 2 months to worth through on their own timescale would feel like value for money to them. They never feel forced to buy anything other than the sort of content they want to play, so if they aren't a pvper, they never have to pay to unlock pvp zones / battlegrounds. Not a raider, don't bother buying the raids.