Unlike the many before this, those who have never played a f2p or played a shitty f2p.
Maplestory has made more revenue over it's lifetime being f2p with an item mall than the likes of some of the p2p. F2P is a stronger model and yes will take over the MMO gaming world. get used to it. I rather pay for what i want than be charged 20 bucks a month for a bunch of crap i don't enjoy. Those who are leaving once MMOs go RMT. good riddence to bad rubbish.
For those who say item malls are a unbalanced haven't played balanced f2p games. The problem is f2p games are usally korean and are grinds. P2P have quality to them while the f2p don't. Once the rest of the world starts using this model quality will not be an options. There is even talks about Star Wars: TOR might be Micro-transaction, you know how peopel are siked for that game? The questions isn't when it's going to happen it's when will the stigma be worn out.
One of the MMO's I had watched was a samurai one or something and they had a really interested payment plant/f2p scheme.
You can try the game all you want and venture all the content for free with one exception, as a free to play member you are just some random peddler/pedestrian from the world who cannot weild a sword but can still chat, and venture around with other players.
Once you see whether you like from what you experience in the world from watching other people/getting to know the world, you can start the payment plan and then you are granted access to learn bushido and pick up a sword to fight. The free side of the game would have a few quests that you could do as a simpleton which would progress you in the direction to get permission from the person or whoever which gives you your sword once you opt to pay.
I liked the idea because even as a free palyer with the restrictions, you could still do things like gather, craft, trade, talk, maybe fist combat lol? And overall be part of the world, and when you are ready to pay, the path is very straight forward in how to become a paying member. Basically a solid black and white living in unison without becoming gray.
Question: When a game has both micro-transactions and an optional subscription fee, is it still considered free to play?
Answer: No. (So stop being a cheapskate and just pay for a sub to a decent game )
Hope that helps
Ya because not wanting to pay 180 a year and being locked into one game, makes you a cheapskate. Even if you do pay for the game doesnt mean all your friends want to pay for it too.
My message was an obviously failed attempt at a humorous dig at Richard, hence the sticky out tongue smiley. This chap is just posting multiple articles telling everyone how great F2P is and how it will rule the MMO world. I've got nothing against people who enjoy F2P games, I get that some people can't afford to sub to a game and F2P might be their only choice, or maybe they just don't want to feel tied to a subscription, hey it's different strokes for different folks and all that. I'm just getting a bit sick of hearing how F2P, T2P, Microtransactions is the way forward. I'm not saying it doesn't have a place, just that it is not the only solution. A subscription based plan still has plenty of scope for working perfectly fine in MMO's imho.
However you raise an interesting point about friends being 'locked out', surely this can happen in the F2P, T2P games as well, what if you have access to bits of the gameworld that your friend doesn't because they can't afford it, what if you can afford all those lovely double XP potions and your friend can't and before you know it your 20 levels higher and unable to group.
My own opinion, and thats all it is, is that F2P just does not fit the western style of MMO gaming, I feel this is why we've had a glut of Asian MMO's trying to make it over in the west, it's because they know that that kind of playstyle suites F2P, Microtransactions etc. But it doesn't work that well with the quite different western MMO dynamic
What was the point of this article? Honestly, I read this website to be informed on MMO's. This guy, however, is still saying "Oh my God, there are free MMO's?"
Who ever said this man was qualified to write these articles? String together a few pieces of info from the FAQ of two F2P games is not enough to justify your position as a writer. There are certainly better writers on this site them him. A lot of the members, for certain. Dana's articles always make me think.
The next article he'll have will be called "MMORPG's: They're Like RPG's, but Multiplayer"
A lot of people may be aware of the fact that Sony uses this model for their games now; Everquest, Everquest 2, etc. Not only is the item shop items being shoved in people's face in Everquest there are also the buying of card games and obtaining items in game. Sony is the lowest of the low in the industry. They will attempt to milk their playerbase more than any other company. It would be wise for people to show they do not like this type of greed by not playing Sony Online games.
I myself will never play their games because of their greedy nature. There are too many more MMOs that are made better and they give you more for your money without shoving item shops and other money grabs in your face. They still charge the 15/month for their old worn out games as well. Vote no with your wallets so this doesn't continue to spread like a disease.
F2P is such misinformed term. Misinformed because people hear that word "free" and just assume that it is going to also be good and free. Unfortunately, neither is the case. Anyone every hear of the terms "no such thing as a free lunch" or "you get what you pay for". Both terms apply to MMO's as much as they do to anything else. The company making an MMO "f2p" has to get it's money from somewhere. If it doesn't get it from subs and it doesn't get it from micros then what do you things gets pulled out (or rather never put in)......content and probably quality. Those companies just budget what they CAN afford so they do make money. So, F2P is always going to cost SOMETHING and it will always be at the expense of the players!
Unlike the many before this, those who have never played a f2p or played a shitty f2p.
Maplestory has made more revenue over it's lifetime being f2p with an item mall than the likes of some of the p2p. F2P is a stronger model and yes will take over the MMO gaming world. get used to it. I rather pay for what i want than be charged 20 bucks a month for a bunch of crap i don't enjoy. Those who are leaving once MMOs go RMT. good riddence to bad rubbish. For those who say item malls are a unbalanced haven't played balanced f2p games. The problem is f2p games are usally korean and are grinds. P2P have quality to them while the f2p don't. Once the rest of the world starts using this model quality will not be an options. There is even talks about Star Wars: TOR might be Micro-transaction, you know how peopel are siked for that game? The questions isn't when it's going to happen it's when will the stigma be worn out.
Stigma? This is about consumers (the ones that play the games and pay their bills) defending their interest of paying for quality and content instead of something that is purely virtual, automatically generated and an endless sink of real money (what do IRL malls do? provide you as many ways for you to spend money on as they can, and keep improving, changing with that objective ). Give up on this and you'll see games with increasing costs per month for competitivity. Because if consumers don't do that, you'll see the developers all going that way, it gives them more money why wouldn't they do it? Maybe because games have always been about providing fun as a service, hence before this F2P marketing lie all games have been about purchasing a box and in the case of MMOs paying a monthly fee (you know, server costs and paying developers)
Item malls sticking to vanity items is pure BS. They are the main and sometimes only form of revenue, so developing will be around making the item mall attractive.
True gamers pay for their games, not for their items. You play to have fun and consequently you grow stronger in the game and acquire items. Money rips this balance apart, especially since games take more and more a route with RPG permanent elements, heck, even FPS and sport games have it now, makes us think in the past when FPS were games like CS - join the server, go pewpew, done. There were no achievements, no levels, nothing persists after that round is over.
This "stigma" wearing off will mean the death of the MMO genre as a kind of game, instead you will be playing virtual shopping malls that let you kill avatars of other people, the more you spend the better will be to do that.
i would gladly pay more for in game items on games i am already paying a monthly sub for, i have bought 30 bucks worth of booster packs for CoX, gladly 10 dollars a pop for an entire costume set, i dint mind it, great game, but the isue with most people i think, is the general quality of f2p games,hell some of the p2p games arnt doing so well,..LoTR,..i dont care what any of you say, a game that is doing well doesnt have 10 dollar subs,and that game looks great and plays well,theres just a combination of ingrediants that i dont completly understand taht makes a game successfull, and its not just getting over the f2p tag, naturally your going to pay less money to ake a f2p game, and then try to make money on item malls , mulyiple sub types, f2p zones, whatever, a low budget game is like a low busget movie,..you get what you pay for , oh i am going on again, basicly i am saying ,..you cant polish a turd,..and no one wants to pay for a polished turd,..no matter how you package it, eventually everyone gonna figure out its a polished turd. THE END
LoTRO offered a $9.99 subscription as an anniversary promotion, AND you had to buty at least 3 months. Also, that promotion ends at the end of June and price will go back to $14.99. So please don't make assumptions with incomplete info.
Unlike the many before this, those who have never played a f2p or played a shitty f2p.
Maplestory has made more revenue over it's lifetime being f2p with an item mall than the likes of some of the p2p. F2P is a stronger model and yes will take over the MMO gaming world. get used to it. I rather pay for what i want than be charged 20 bucks a month for a bunch of crap i don't enjoy. Those who are leaving once MMOs go RMT. good riddence to bad rubbish. For those who say item malls are a unbalanced haven't played balanced f2p games. The problem is f2p games are usally korean and are grinds. P2P have quality to them while the f2p don't. Once the rest of the world starts using this model quality will not be an options. There is even talks about Star Wars: TOR might be Micro-transaction, you know how peopel are siked for that game? The questions isn't when it's going to happen it's when will the stigma be worn out.
fanboy rant, not usable as evidence of the "good" of RMT. Good riddance to you.
Outside of WoW, F2P titles generate the most revenue in the MMO industry.
I also play CoH/V and have paid a monthly fee, plus bought the bonus packs at $10 a pop. I haven't done any server transfers or bought extra character slots, but these can be bought too.
P2P snobbery really has to stop. F2P offers a much cheaper entry into the MMO market - pay for the box, then pay $15 a month vs download it for free and only pay if you like it. Arguably F2P has to do more to keep players interested - if they can't, they lose out immediately, whereas P2P titles can coast on sub revenue while promising more features "soon".
Quality isn't a valid argument either. Last year's major P2P launches were AoC and WAR - hardly polished affairs.
F2P, or at least increased micro-trans options, are the way things are going because MMOs cost multimillion dollar budgets to develop and operate, which your $15 a month only goes a tiny, tiny way to covering while the number of titles is increasing. Letting players who want to pay more than $15 a month for in-game benefit makes sense. There are lines that are probably best not to cross - buying an 'I Win' button, for instance - but please don't confuse corporate greed with being able to afford to keep the lights on.
When i saw that topic on the mainpage, i was about to ask how many more F2P articles this fellow is going to write. Clicking on the comments i see you guys alrweady beat me on that.
It seem like he is on some sort of mission to cleance the western gamingpopulation from the p2p scourge.
Thanks, but i still prefer a solid orc for 12,99 a month over Mutsishaji the orphan robo-kungfu-vampire with the 10ft sword and cosmic brain powers from the item shop.
RMT for some items in a MMO actually battles gold farmers and rampant inflation on the AH's.
If you buy cool clothes, houses, mounts and other things that usually cost a LOT of in-game money for real money instead then people wont be that desperate to generate a large amount of in-game cash.
Then you can go into a serious campaign of undercutting prices massively and by doing that press prices down (since there wont be a need for the huge cash elements anymore). And the more you press prices down, the more the in-game money you already have is worth and so by dumping prices you become wealthier and the gold farmers will lose their business since everyone can get enough in-game money to buy things they need.
It just that some intelligent RMTs and some dedicated players to kill the gold farming business.
"You are the hero our legends have foretold will save our tribe, therefore please go kill 10 pigs."
RMT for some items in a MMO actually battles gold farmers and rampant inflation on the AH's. If you buy cool clothes, houses, mounts and other things that usually cost a LOT of in-game money for real money instead then people wont be that desperate to generate a large amount of in-game cash. Then you can go into a serious campaign of undercutting prices massively and by doing that press prices down (since there wont be a need for the huge cash elements anymore). And the more you press prices down, the more the in-game money you already have is worth and so by dumping prices you become wealthier and the gold farmers will lose their business since everyone can get enough in-game money to buy things they need. It just that some intelligent RMTs and some dedicated players to kill the gold farming business.
There is nothing intelligent about RMT in P2P games other than the intelligence of the developer to suck more money from their player base. Players like me will jump ship quickly when this garbage is added though to a game I am paying monthly for. There are better ways to handle gold sellers than join them. The can't beat them, join them attitude doesn't work.
I could name a few ways off the top of my head to help against gold farming. I personally would like to see in game commerce taken out of the hands of the players. Everything should be bought and sold to NPCs. That right there would remove the issue. Everything could be bind on pick up or only tradeable between characters on the same account, never an other account. There are ways to combat gold farming and I would rather remove the player economy before RMT "fixes" the issue for us.
You have to applaud Richard, he keeps writing these articles even when we keep burning them to toast. Oh he is paid for them, a salve to his charred fingers.
It is so fortunate that in Richards world something that is ‘inevitable’ is also ‘good’ for our hobby. Yes our hobby, our pursuit, our pastime, for which F2P is not inevitable nor good.
This bit of faulty logic about the beneficial effects of RMT revenue models particularly stuck out:
“In fact, it's a way of promoting growth; it helps to reach new consumers by providing alternatives that better fit their preferences. In a way, it's kind of like marketing changes we see all the time in other areas, such as adding a new package size, another color or a different combination of burger toppings.”
No its not Richard, you are confusing product with revenue. Gamers are not getting a choice ‘that fits their preferences’ in your version of a MMO which I will call ‘Burger Online’. We all have to play the same game, even with RMT’s. A few extra RMT outfits will not change the game to fit someone’s preferences but RMT’s that distort game balance will leave a bad taste in the mouth for the rest of us playing Burger Online. All gamers will get is a choice of which revenue model they dip into, nothing more.
It is perhaps revealing that you choose to think of MMO’s as burgers in which the most important element is ‘fun’. A good MMO is a three course meal, not F2P Fast Food. The dessert is fun but the main meal is teamwork, community and being part of a story.
OP can post this kind of articles everyday. That won't change my mind. I don't want to be forced to spend all my money and live in parents basement only to be competitive with players that do it. The day when last mmorpg with monthly subscription will close is the day I will stop playing mmorpgs. You can say anything you want but 'west' have more common sense than 'east'.
I'm confused. The article asks "if" and "when" we will see games with both a subscription fee and microtransactions. What about EQ2? Surely there are others? Also: just because some (or at least one) exist already doesn't make it a good idea. Quite the opposite.
|The problem with the youth of today is that one is no longer part of it. -Salvador Dali|
Oh, and DDO isn't a fast food game. If you think F2P can change such game to being a fastfood, be prepared for trouble once you take this approach while playing. DDO was always a game demanding some maturity, quests, traps and this whole system isn't your Free Realms nor Warrior Epic. Nor WoW.
Is this article about paying the $5 / mo subscription to FreeRealms to open up all of the classes only to find that you still have to buy virtual your pet with real money? If so then I totally agree with your outrage.
I'd like to see an article that delves into the unknown area of making a MMO that has both PvE and PvP. Can it be done and if so will players one day reject the killing of innocent NPCs due to the lifelikiness of players? There is a grey line that makes me think some people should avoid crossing, but each the own is.
Question: When a game has both micro-transactions and an optional subscription fee, is it still considered free to play?
Answer: No. (So stop being a cheapskate and just pay for a sub to a decent game )
Hope that helps
Ya because not wanting to pay 180 a year and being locked into one game, makes you a cheapskate. Even if you do pay for the game doesnt mean all your friends want to pay for it too.
NEWS FLASH: The average cash shop player spends MORE than $300/year.
Google your information next time before degrading your "mortal standpoint" even further in a community (Real MMO players) that despise the sub-par gameplay F2P induces.
Seriously, I'm starting to believe Richard is getting paid commission per article he writes trying to "Hype" the crappy F2P market. Getting the "word" out won't make us all mindless zombies and play crappy F2P games.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity: Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Richard makes some great points here. There are definitely big shifts occuring with the payment/revenue models of online, traditionally subscription based games. I for one, think these changes are an extremely good thing. It means the MMO industry is exploring its flexibility and price elasticity. There are plenty of games, Like EVE Online for example, which I do not think merit $15 a month every month. Sometimes,, I just want to set a timed training that takes many days and I won't be playing. What an excellent candidate for a non-subscription, single microtransaction that is reduced from the full subscription cost. EVE Online is a good example of what I would say is artificially inelastic for no good reason.
Thanks for this look into things, Richard! Keep it up
The basic issue I have with all these pricing/revenue models is that they just seem to try to 'trick' me into paying more then I want to. As a consumer I want to know what I pay for and what I can expect if I can keep playing.
With a P2P there is a set monthly fee and the decision for me is whether the content I am playing through each month is worth that fee.
With all these F2P models it becomes harder to figure out what exactly I am paying for. Some of them are straightforward and say you 'pay this much and ou get this'. Those I respect. Others are getting too convoluted and seem like a lot of bait-and-switch where I never know if what I come it to buy is actually what I am gonna get.
This is nothing but greed plain and simple. I refuse to play any game that supports both subscription and RMT at the same time. I prefere to stick with B2P then P2P MMO's because I pay a flat fee every month and have access to everything in that game I don't have to spend an extra $20 or more except for expansion releases. Seriously what are MMO's coming to these days? These companys want to be greedy but they will end up seeing that their greed will destroy the MMO as they scam their players.
So if this is the start of what I have to look forward to for future MMO's then I will just throw my PC out and stick with my console games. To even have an edge in a F2P MMO you must use the cashshop and the way these companys work most of thier cashshops you only keep the item for a set amount of time in which case you end up spending money over and over and it adds up over time.
Like I said I will stick with B2P then P2P till they decide to screw those up also by adding RMT crap. Right now I don't see me playing MMO's in 5 years at the rate this industry is going.
I think we are a little hard on Richard here. I may not agree with the guy, but I don't think he's a plant for the asian grinders or anything like that.
The industry is changing, and Richard is only discussing the changes, as we are here. Personally, I think the changes in the industry are for the worse, because the focus from the MMO publishers is so different today than what it once was.
I remember when MMOs first went mainstream back in the early '90s with UO. The game wasn't designed to extract money from the players. It was designed to be a great game, and sold on the shelves alongside other games. To tell you the truth, if those guys at Origin had it their way, they wouldn't charge the monthly at all, because the monthly kept the game out of many hands (my own included).
The monthly wasn't about making uber-cash back then. The monthly was about paying the bills. And I remember the whole way they tried to sell the monthly to us in the FAQs of that time. Specifically, the monthly would be used to make the game better. The way they made money was through the boxes, not the monthly. And as a result, we got a lot of nice staff to solve CS issues, run live events, and create content during that era. We paid more, but we also got more.
Somewhere along the line, the publishers stopped thinking about the monthly as a way to pay the bills, and started to think about the monthly as the thing they sold. The monthly was no longer justified to players as a thing that made the game better, but more like a player's "membership dues." Anything extra was an extra charge, most commonly in the form of expansion packs you'd get off the shelf. We pay a lot more now, but we get so much less today. Staff has been cut, development is funneled into $30 and $15 expansion packs, and the games are no longer a synergy between developers and players like it once was. The only thing a box buys us these days is an opportunity to buy a sub. And the only thing a sub buys us is server access.
Buying into a subscription-based MMO today makes a whole lot less sense today than it did back then...and even then it didn't make much sense. We've gotten used to the idea, but the whole mindset of the publishers today is about giving us the least amount of game possible for the most amount of money possible.
And that's the real thing that stinks about the microtransaction games. It's not about financing a well-designed game, like in the old days. It's about designing a game around a finance model, which means that the game is purposely designed to be a disappointment unless you throw more money into it.
The only reason I picked up SWG in 2003 was that it gave me more game for less money than I would otherwise spend. Since that time, so many other games have stepped up their operations to include all the things that made MMOs such a good value...like frequent content updates and online play over common servers...and get this...all for one single payment of $50 or less that you spend at the counter at your local Best Buy! Compared with that, WoW looks like a scam.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm all about what Richard is trying to say when he wants to take down the "entry costs" to this form of internet entertainment. However, I'm not sure that microtransactions are the way to make this genre appealing. And the reason is this: offering "more game for more money" isn't the thing that made MMOs appealing in the early days. It was the fact that MMOs gave a person "more game for less money" that made MMOs better than online peer-to-peer and single player. But it seems today that this whole concept is better met by the new peer-to-peer and single player games; games that offer a whole lot more game for a much lower cost to the consumer than a similar experience in an MMO.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Comments
I'd also never consider playing a P2P and F2P mix.
And i have yet to find a F2P game that was worth playing, period.
Just my opinion, of course........;
Unlike the many before this, those who have never played a f2p or played a shitty f2p.
Maplestory has made more revenue over it's lifetime being f2p with an item mall than the likes of some of the p2p. F2P is a stronger model and yes will take over the MMO gaming world. get used to it. I rather pay for what i want than be charged 20 bucks a month for a bunch of crap i don't enjoy. Those who are leaving once MMOs go RMT. good riddence to bad rubbish.
For those who say item malls are a unbalanced haven't played balanced f2p games. The problem is f2p games are usally korean and are grinds. P2P have quality to them while the f2p don't. Once the rest of the world starts using this model quality will not be an options. There is even talks about Star Wars: TOR might be Micro-transaction, you know how peopel are siked for that game? The questions isn't when it's going to happen it's when will the stigma be worn out.
One of the MMO's I had watched was a samurai one or something and they had a really interested payment plant/f2p scheme.
You can try the game all you want and venture all the content for free with one exception, as a free to play member you are just some random peddler/pedestrian from the world who cannot weild a sword but can still chat, and venture around with other players.
Once you see whether you like from what you experience in the world from watching other people/getting to know the world, you can start the payment plan and then you are granted access to learn bushido and pick up a sword to fight. The free side of the game would have a few quests that you could do as a simpleton which would progress you in the direction to get permission from the person or whoever which gives you your sword once you opt to pay.
I liked the idea because even as a free palyer with the restrictions, you could still do things like gather, craft, trade, talk, maybe fist combat lol? And overall be part of the world, and when you are ready to pay, the path is very straight forward in how to become a paying member. Basically a solid black and white living in unison without becoming gray.
Ya because not wanting to pay 180 a year and being locked into one game, makes you a cheapskate. Even if you do pay for the game doesnt mean all your friends want to pay for it too.
My message was an obviously failed attempt at a humorous dig at Richard, hence the sticky out tongue smiley. This chap is just posting multiple articles telling everyone how great F2P is and how it will rule the MMO world. I've got nothing against people who enjoy F2P games, I get that some people can't afford to sub to a game and F2P might be their only choice, or maybe they just don't want to feel tied to a subscription, hey it's different strokes for different folks and all that. I'm just getting a bit sick of hearing how F2P, T2P, Microtransactions is the way forward. I'm not saying it doesn't have a place, just that it is not the only solution. A subscription based plan still has plenty of scope for working perfectly fine in MMO's imho.
However you raise an interesting point about friends being 'locked out', surely this can happen in the F2P, T2P games as well, what if you have access to bits of the gameworld that your friend doesn't because they can't afford it, what if you can afford all those lovely double XP potions and your friend can't and before you know it your 20 levels higher and unable to group.
My own opinion, and thats all it is, is that F2P just does not fit the western style of MMO gaming, I feel this is why we've had a glut of Asian MMO's trying to make it over in the west, it's because they know that that kind of playstyle suites F2P, Microtransactions etc. But it doesn't work that well with the quite different western MMO dynamic
What was the point of this article? Honestly, I read this website to be informed on MMO's. This guy, however, is still saying "Oh my God, there are free MMO's?"
Who ever said this man was qualified to write these articles? String together a few pieces of info from the FAQ of two F2P games is not enough to justify your position as a writer. There are certainly better writers on this site them him. A lot of the members, for certain. Dana's articles always make me think.
The next article he'll have will be called "MMORPG's: They're Like RPG's, but Multiplayer"
A lot of people may be aware of the fact that Sony uses this model for their games now; Everquest, Everquest 2, etc. Not only is the item shop items being shoved in people's face in Everquest there are also the buying of card games and obtaining items in game. Sony is the lowest of the low in the industry. They will attempt to milk their playerbase more than any other company. It would be wise for people to show they do not like this type of greed by not playing Sony Online games.
I myself will never play their games because of their greedy nature. There are too many more MMOs that are made better and they give you more for your money without shoving item shops and other money grabs in your face. They still charge the 15/month for their old worn out games as well. Vote no with your wallets so this doesn't continue to spread like a disease.
F2P is such misinformed term. Misinformed because people hear that word "free" and just assume that it is going to also be good and free. Unfortunately, neither is the case. Anyone every hear of the terms "no such thing as a free lunch" or "you get what you pay for". Both terms apply to MMO's as much as they do to anything else. The company making an MMO "f2p" has to get it's money from somewhere. If it doesn't get it from subs and it doesn't get it from micros then what do you things gets pulled out (or rather never put in)......content and probably quality. Those companies just budget what they CAN afford so they do make money. So, F2P is always going to cost SOMETHING and it will always be at the expense of the players!
Let's party like it is 1863!
Stigma? This is about consumers (the ones that play the games and pay their bills) defending their interest of paying for quality and content instead of something that is purely virtual, automatically generated and an endless sink of real money (what do IRL malls do? provide you as many ways for you to spend money on as they can, and keep improving, changing with that objective ). Give up on this and you'll see games with increasing costs per month for competitivity. Because if consumers don't do that, you'll see the developers all going that way, it gives them more money why wouldn't they do it? Maybe because games have always been about providing fun as a service, hence before this F2P marketing lie all games have been about purchasing a box and in the case of MMOs paying a monthly fee (you know, server costs and paying developers)
Item malls sticking to vanity items is pure BS. They are the main and sometimes only form of revenue, so developing will be around making the item mall attractive.
True gamers pay for their games, not for their items. You play to have fun and consequently you grow stronger in the game and acquire items. Money rips this balance apart, especially since games take more and more a route with RPG permanent elements, heck, even FPS and sport games have it now, makes us think in the past when FPS were games like CS - join the server, go pewpew, done. There were no achievements, no levels, nothing persists after that round is over.
This "stigma" wearing off will mean the death of the MMO genre as a kind of game, instead you will be playing virtual shopping malls that let you kill avatars of other people, the more you spend the better will be to do that.
LoTRO offered a $9.99 subscription as an anniversary promotion, AND you had to buty at least 3 months. Also, that promotion ends at the end of June and price will go back to $14.99. So please don't make assumptions with incomplete info.
I was so moved by this thread that instead of bombarding you with a zomungous wall of text I wrote a blog in response, tell me what you think.
fanboy rant, not usable as evidence of the "good" of RMT. Good riddance to you.
Outside of WoW, F2P titles generate the most revenue in the MMO industry.
I also play CoH/V and have paid a monthly fee, plus bought the bonus packs at $10 a pop. I haven't done any server transfers or bought extra character slots, but these can be bought too.
P2P snobbery really has to stop. F2P offers a much cheaper entry into the MMO market - pay for the box, then pay $15 a month vs download it for free and only pay if you like it. Arguably F2P has to do more to keep players interested - if they can't, they lose out immediately, whereas P2P titles can coast on sub revenue while promising more features "soon".
Quality isn't a valid argument either. Last year's major P2P launches were AoC and WAR - hardly polished affairs.
F2P, or at least increased micro-trans options, are the way things are going because MMOs cost multimillion dollar budgets to develop and operate, which your $15 a month only goes a tiny, tiny way to covering while the number of titles is increasing. Letting players who want to pay more than $15 a month for in-game benefit makes sense. There are lines that are probably best not to cross - buying an 'I Win' button, for instance - but please don't confuse corporate greed with being able to afford to keep the lights on.
When i saw that topic on the mainpage, i was about to ask how many more F2P articles this fellow is going to write. Clicking on the comments i see you guys alrweady beat me on that.
It seem like he is on some sort of mission to cleance the western gamingpopulation from the p2p scourge.
Thanks, but i still prefer a solid orc for 12,99 a month over Mutsishaji the orphan robo-kungfu-vampire with the 10ft sword and cosmic brain powers from the item shop.
I guess your target audience is that way:
RMT for some items in a MMO actually battles gold farmers and rampant inflation on the AH's.
If you buy cool clothes, houses, mounts and other things that usually cost a LOT of in-game money for real money instead then people wont be that desperate to generate a large amount of in-game cash.
Then you can go into a serious campaign of undercutting prices massively and by doing that press prices down (since there wont be a need for the huge cash elements anymore). And the more you press prices down, the more the in-game money you already have is worth and so by dumping prices you become wealthier and the gold farmers will lose their business since everyone can get enough in-game money to buy things they need.
It just that some intelligent RMTs and some dedicated players to kill the gold farming business.
"You are the hero our legends have foretold will save our tribe, therefore please go kill 10 pigs."
There is nothing intelligent about RMT in P2P games other than the intelligence of the developer to suck more money from their player base. Players like me will jump ship quickly when this garbage is added though to a game I am paying monthly for. There are better ways to handle gold sellers than join them. The can't beat them, join them attitude doesn't work.
I could name a few ways off the top of my head to help against gold farming. I personally would like to see in game commerce taken out of the hands of the players. Everything should be bought and sold to NPCs. That right there would remove the issue. Everything could be bind on pick up or only tradeable between characters on the same account, never an other account. There are ways to combat gold farming and I would rather remove the player economy before RMT "fixes" the issue for us.
F2P Fast Food
You have to applaud Richard, he keeps writing these articles even when we keep burning them to toast. Oh he is paid for them, a salve to his charred fingers.
It is so fortunate that in Richards world something that is ‘inevitable’ is also ‘good’ for our hobby. Yes our hobby, our pursuit, our pastime, for which F2P is not inevitable nor good.
This bit of faulty logic about the beneficial effects of RMT revenue models particularly stuck out:
“In fact, it's a way of promoting growth; it helps to reach new consumers by providing alternatives that better fit their preferences. In a way, it's kind of like marketing changes we see all the time in other areas, such as adding a new package size, another color or a different combination of burger toppings.”
No its not Richard, you are confusing product with revenue. Gamers are not getting a choice ‘that fits their preferences’ in your version of a MMO which I will call ‘Burger Online’. We all have to play the same game, even with RMT’s. A few extra RMT outfits will not change the game to fit someone’s preferences but RMT’s that distort game balance will leave a bad taste in the mouth for the rest of us playing Burger Online. All gamers will get is a choice of which revenue model they dip into, nothing more.
It is perhaps revealing that you choose to think of MMO’s as burgers in which the most important element is ‘fun’. A good MMO is a three course meal, not F2P Fast Food. The dessert is fun but the main meal is teamwork, community and being part of a story.
OP can post this kind of articles everyday. That won't change my mind. I don't want to be forced to spend all my money and live in parents basement only to be competitive with players that do it. The day when last mmorpg with monthly subscription will close is the day I will stop playing mmorpgs. You can say anything you want but 'west' have more common sense than 'east'.
I'm confused. The article asks "if" and "when" we will see games with both a subscription fee and microtransactions. What about EQ2? Surely there are others? Also: just because some (or at least one) exist already doesn't make it a good idea. Quite the opposite.
|The problem with the youth of today is that one is no longer part of it. -Salvador Dali|
The more, the better. They're great
.
Oh, and DDO isn't a fast food game. If you think F2P can change such game to being a fastfood, be prepared for trouble once you take this approach while playing. DDO was always a game demanding some maturity, quests, traps and this whole system isn't your Free Realms nor Warrior Epic. Nor WoW.
Polish Sword Coast Legends Portal http://www.swordcoast.pl/
SwordCoast.pl Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SwordCoastPL/
SwordCoast.pl Twitter: https://twitter.com/SwordCoastPL
Polish Neverwinter Portal http://www.neverwinter.com.pl/
Polish D&D Online Portal http://www.ddopl.com
DDOpl Twitter: http://twitter.com/DDOpl
Great DDO PodCast by Jerry & co. http://www.ddocast.com
Is this article about paying the $5 / mo subscription to FreeRealms to open up all of the classes only to find that you still have to buy virtual your pet with real money? If so then I totally agree with your outrage.
I'd like to see an article that delves into the unknown area of making a MMO that has both PvE and PvP. Can it be done and if so will players one day reject the killing of innocent NPCs due to the lifelikiness of players? There is a grey line that makes me think some people should avoid crossing, but each the own is.
Ya because not wanting to pay 180 a year and being locked into one game, makes you a cheapskate. Even if you do pay for the game doesnt mean all your friends want to pay for it too.
NEWS FLASH: The average cash shop player spends MORE than $300/year.
Google your information next time before degrading your "mortal standpoint" even further in a community (Real MMO players) that despise the sub-par gameplay F2P induces.
Seriously, I'm starting to believe Richard is getting paid commission per article he writes trying to "Hype" the crappy F2P market. Getting the "word" out won't make us all mindless zombies and play crappy F2P games.
The Theory of Conservative Conservation of Ignorant Stupidity:
Having a different opinion must mean you're a troll.
Richard makes some great points here. There are definitely big shifts occuring with the payment/revenue models of online, traditionally subscription based games. I for one, think these changes are an extremely good thing. It means the MMO industry is exploring its flexibility and price elasticity. There are plenty of games, Like EVE Online for example, which I do not think merit $15 a month every month. Sometimes,, I just want to set a timed training that takes many days and I won't be playing. What an excellent candidate for a non-subscription, single microtransaction that is reduced from the full subscription cost. EVE Online is a good example of what I would say is artificially inelastic for no good reason.
Thanks for this look into things, Richard! Keep it up
The basic issue I have with all these pricing/revenue models is that they just seem to try to 'trick' me into paying more then I want to. As a consumer I want to know what I pay for and what I can expect if I can keep playing.
With a P2P there is a set monthly fee and the decision for me is whether the content I am playing through each month is worth that fee.
With all these F2P models it becomes harder to figure out what exactly I am paying for. Some of them are straightforward and say you 'pay this much and ou get this'. Those I respect. Others are getting too convoluted and seem like a lot of bait-and-switch where I never know if what I come it to buy is actually what I am gonna get.
This is nothing but greed plain and simple. I refuse to play any game that supports both subscription and RMT at the same time. I prefere to stick with B2P then P2P MMO's because I pay a flat fee every month and have access to everything in that game I don't have to spend an extra $20 or more except for expansion releases. Seriously what are MMO's coming to these days? These companys want to be greedy but they will end up seeing that their greed will destroy the MMO as they scam their players.
So if this is the start of what I have to look forward to for future MMO's then I will just throw my PC out and stick with my console games. To even have an edge in a F2P MMO you must use the cashshop and the way these companys work most of thier cashshops you only keep the item for a set amount of time in which case you end up spending money over and over and it adds up over time.
Like I said I will stick with B2P then P2P till they decide to screw those up also by adding RMT crap. Right now I don't see me playing MMO's in 5 years at the rate this industry is going.
I think we are a little hard on Richard here. I may not agree with the guy, but I don't think he's a plant for the asian grinders or anything like that.
The industry is changing, and Richard is only discussing the changes, as we are here. Personally, I think the changes in the industry are for the worse, because the focus from the MMO publishers is so different today than what it once was.
I remember when MMOs first went mainstream back in the early '90s with UO. The game wasn't designed to extract money from the players. It was designed to be a great game, and sold on the shelves alongside other games. To tell you the truth, if those guys at Origin had it their way, they wouldn't charge the monthly at all, because the monthly kept the game out of many hands (my own included).
The monthly wasn't about making uber-cash back then. The monthly was about paying the bills. And I remember the whole way they tried to sell the monthly to us in the FAQs of that time. Specifically, the monthly would be used to make the game better. The way they made money was through the boxes, not the monthly. And as a result, we got a lot of nice staff to solve CS issues, run live events, and create content during that era. We paid more, but we also got more.
Somewhere along the line, the publishers stopped thinking about the monthly as a way to pay the bills, and started to think about the monthly as the thing they sold. The monthly was no longer justified to players as a thing that made the game better, but more like a player's "membership dues." Anything extra was an extra charge, most commonly in the form of expansion packs you'd get off the shelf. We pay a lot more now, but we get so much less today. Staff has been cut, development is funneled into $30 and $15 expansion packs, and the games are no longer a synergy between developers and players like it once was. The only thing a box buys us these days is an opportunity to buy a sub. And the only thing a sub buys us is server access.
Buying into a subscription-based MMO today makes a whole lot less sense today than it did back then...and even then it didn't make much sense. We've gotten used to the idea, but the whole mindset of the publishers today is about giving us the least amount of game possible for the most amount of money possible.
And that's the real thing that stinks about the microtransaction games. It's not about financing a well-designed game, like in the old days. It's about designing a game around a finance model, which means that the game is purposely designed to be a disappointment unless you throw more money into it.
The only reason I picked up SWG in 2003 was that it gave me more game for less money than I would otherwise spend. Since that time, so many other games have stepped up their operations to include all the things that made MMOs such a good value...like frequent content updates and online play over common servers...and get this...all for one single payment of $50 or less that you spend at the counter at your local Best Buy! Compared with that, WoW looks like a scam.
So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm all about what Richard is trying to say when he wants to take down the "entry costs" to this form of internet entertainment. However, I'm not sure that microtransactions are the way to make this genre appealing. And the reason is this: offering "more game for more money" isn't the thing that made MMOs appealing in the early days. It was the fact that MMOs gave a person "more game for less money" that made MMOs better than online peer-to-peer and single player. But it seems today that this whole concept is better met by the new peer-to-peer and single player games; games that offer a whole lot more game for a much lower cost to the consumer than a similar experience in an MMO.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE