I don't think its a trend yet. However if we continue to see it more and more then yes.
I would like to comment on the one paragraph were these game under performing. The answer would be yes.
It was a well known fact that lotro has/had been having retention problems. There is a lot of debate as to why, mostly it would be the gear and raid gates that locked folks out of certain areas they were paying for. I had been saying on the lotro forums we were headed for this in 2012, I actually said the game was going to die in 2012. It reached that point much sooner. come September 15/16 it will bee free to play. Lotro will be newly reborn and only a former shadow of itself. The reason why is most of the game experience is now turned to the new players. While only giving small little bits to folks at the cap level.
Now lets look at eq2. Under performing there yes too. The game has been around six years. It suffers with the stygma of the SOE name on it. Lots of folks will never touch an SOE game now due to things that have happened to other games. I.E. swg, matrix, planet side, and others. However EQ2 is not going totally free to play. There are two different servers. The free to play side and the side I still play on the subscriber based side. Who knows how this is going to work out.
I will end with saying this, give a few months and lets see what kind of name that Turbine and Soe comes out with, I got a feeling that there will be a lot of newly generated discontent for both these companies in the near future.
So can you post a link to theese "facts" or what?
Most of the headcount posts have been deleted about 3 months back when they decided to clean out the forums in lotro. It had been a hotly debated topic, one that resulted in several folks getting the ban hammer. One I can name in particular would be rod. I even had a few tin foil hats put on me for my views, and even pointed out that unless they did something to retain the veteran players that we were going free to play, and 2 months after I said that bam there was the anouncment.
All one had to do was log into game any time with int the past year and do headcounts. I did them for a while myself until I became board with trying to prove that we did have a problem, and get into another heated argument that we either were or were not having issues.. There was an uptake during the xpac, but nothing that has come close to the population counts we had prior mom.
I will just point you over at the lotro forums as after a hard day of work, I'm not going to bother with my time trying to see if any of those threads even exit any more. I know the ones by rod are long gone as well as a lot of the ones I did myself.
There is another post around here about Turbine scouring the forums. I dont know as I dont go there anymore but when I did I can say that anything negative about F2P was not tolerated and a lot of their older promises were removed as well.
More baseless, factless drama.
Baseless fact, well I had to dig for it a while but here you go. The pruned the forums back in June. This got rid of a lot of post like letter from a lifer and others, and the ones that did get necroed well they been locked and let fall down to where unless you know what you looking for your not going to find it. All one had to do was visit the beta forums to see how upset folks were, and how many pages were getting locked, however I can only find one locked thread there now. So somebody been in cleaning mode.
Here is the forum purge post, and a lot of us thought this was done right after the merger with WB and since then they been heavy handed in the moderation. Like it or not it is happening.
For those who don't like clicking on links here is the cut and paste.
Forum Pruning 6/1/2010
The LOTRO forums will be pruned on June 1, 2010. Any thread that has not been active in the previous 90 days will be deleted. If you are aware of a guide, resource or other informative thread that should saved, you can do so by making a relevant post into that thread. This is not an excuse to bump any and every post. The community guidelines regarding bumping will still be in effect. Choose wisely!
Note: Sticky threads, the Hall of Fame, Postcards from Middle-earth, and the J.R.R. Tolkien forum will not be pruned.
"De facto, within the top 10, there can be eight at most that are doing well."
This is the ugliest sentence I've read in about a decade. Not only is that an improper use of the phrase "de facto," but the utterance as a whole is also blatantly false.
I'm sorry to nitpick, but when you use a Latinism on a goddamn GAMING WEBSITE, you should make sure you at least use it correctly. Who are you trying to impress, anyway?! Jesus Christ.
I think it could be labeled a "trend", LOTRO and EQ2 are pretty big name titles....and from seperate companies....and certainly there is alot of hype surrounding the model in the media. Whether it's more of a "fad" then a "trend" remains to be seen though....and I suspect at least partialy will depend on how well the move does for LOTRO and EQ2. Purportedly it did well for DDO....but DDO is really a very different offering then either of those two....and was in a different place subscription wise.
I don't think that there was too much contention that DDO was floundering before the move, so Turbine didn't have much to loose by trying to move it to F2P. I certainly don't buy the LOTRO was underperforming arguement. Clearly the management behind these moves expects that it will gain them much more profit..... whether they are right or not remains to be seen.... If not, it would hardly be the first time that a major corporations management misread a market by trying to change an existing model into something different. Can you say "New Coke."
Again, clearly it worked with DDO...but that doesn't mean it will transalate well elsewhere.
Thirdly, I'm not entirely convinced these moves are entirely directed toward the Western market. They could be....but I also know that LOTRO has been expanding into Asia...I'd be cuorius to see how much that might have influenced thier decision making process with this move.
I am not exactly sure how three games (two of which are from the same company) could be considered a trend. That being said DDO was clearly floundering,(mostly do to some poor choices on the setting of the game) and the move to F2P has seemed to pick it up from the ashes. My conclusion is that Turbine thinks it can add onto its subscription base for LoTRO by moving it to F2P as well. As far as EQ2 is concerned it is in my opinion that Sony just wants to extend the life of its aging IP and boost the interest in its upcoming Everquest Next game.
This hardly constitutes as a trend. Although if either APB, AoC, CO, or STO follow their lead then we might begin to see a the beginning of a trend.
"Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game."-Guybrush Threepwood "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."-Hunter S. Thompson
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE. Games like those on popular community sites such as Facebook and MySpace have free games, mostly those that are browser-based. You can also look at Pogo and even Yahoo Games as true F2P games. But games like DDO, VCO, etc are not really free to play since you are almost always required at some point to purchase something.
I have seen tons of these micro-pay games out over the years. Voyage Century Online, DDO, Atlantica, CABAL, the list goes on and on. The list is growing as well, and as noted by others here several popular subscription-based games are even moving to the micro-pay business model. Why? A lot of companies are seeing that micro-pay actually brings in more profits than subscription-based play.
Games with massive subscriber counts such as WoW don't need micro-pay, they have more than enough subscribers to keep the executive's wallets full. Other games, such as maybe SWG, are gradually falling in subscriber numbers but their game style just isn't suited for micro-pay. But if you can figure out how to get a "failing" game to work with the micro-pay business model, you actually might stand a good chance of reviving the profit intake enough that it could even surpass the previous subscription-based levels.
I'll use Voyage Century Online (VCO) as an example here. Sure, I've seen plenty of players who don't ever purchase Item Mall (IM) items or points directly, but I'd say that at least 75% or more of the players NOT purchasing those items/points themselves still purchase them from others using in-game currency as trade. The game is designed so that it's very difficult to advance far without at least a few IM items. That means that even when players are not purchasing the IM items themselves, by buying/trading the items from other players, those other players are still purchasing the IM for them.
And VCO even has plenty of "VIP" players, many of whom spend $3,000 USD and up per year. That's over $250 USD per month on average! Most non-VIP players might spend an average of $150-$300 per year on IM points, which averages out to about $12-$25 per month. So even though there are quite a few people who do not actually purchase IM points, the rest of the community (especially the VIP members) more than make up for the "loss". When you look at those points, you can see how games like VCO are making much more income via the micro-pay model than if they were to offer a simple monthly-based subscription. But then again, games like that were designed from the ground up as an Item Mall game.
There are also a few games that might be considered "middle-ground", those that offer both true F2P play as well as "premium" memberships. Runescape come to mind especially, which even on full membership only costs roughly $6 USD per month. The F2P game is of course limited severely when compared to the full membership benefits, but the cost of the membership is quite low when compared to other MMO's on the market. Their individual income might not be high per customer, but the sheer number of paying subscribers and low costs of development make up for the difference. This type of business model is a smart alternative to the micro-pay system, helping to attract non-paying players while still pulling in plenty of paying players as well.
I honestly can't see many of the "major" MMO's out there that are currently monthly-based moving towards the micro-pay model though. Games like SWG, EVE, WoW, etc just wouldn't convert well. The best they can do is to offer more items, more quests/missions, more content. Free expansions and updates, major upgrades to features, etc that will hopefully attract new customers and bring back veterans. Very few of the larger games are in danger of the micro-pay movement.
But on the other hand, I do forsee a lot more micro-pay games being developed soon. I'm currently participating in the betas of two micro-pay type games, and I'm aware of at least 3-4 others in development that will be released in the next year or less. Not to mention the countless number of micro-pay games being plopped out by the smaller Asian companies, which cater mostly to their local markets.
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE.
It's still free even if there are optional items that you can purchase. A free concert in the park is still a free concert even if they are selling 5-dollar bottled water there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE.
It's still free even if there are optional items that you can purchase. A free concert in the park is still a free concert even if they are selling 5-dollar bottled water there.
There is water in nature that you can drink and still you buying water? So water is free? "Free to live" - "Pay to be healthy"; "Free to Login" - "Pay to Play" ( play !=i can jump, so i m playing)
I remembered one of my university profs...if you give any sample to make similarity to problem, he always used to yell "dont give me sample, descripe the problem fully nub!!"
LF PvP game...for years...
Current: changing game everyday Played: Shaiya, Aion, Perfect World(short time), Aika Tried: EQ2, DAOC, LOTR, Atlantica Online... Future: Any pvp game..couldnt found yet...
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE.
It's still free even if there are optional items that you can purchase. A free concert in the park is still a free concert even if they are selling 5-dollar bottled water there.
There is water in nature that you can drink and still you buying water? So water is free? "Free to live" - "Pay to be healthy"; "Free to Login" - "Pay to Play" ( play !=i can jump, so i m playing)
I remembered one of my university profs...if you give any sample to make similarity to problem, he always used to yell "dont give me sample, descripe the problem fully nub!!"
Rofl that's funny but true.
The problem is as follows.
Play to Play: For x dollars a month you get everything.
Free to Play For Free you get to point B, at that point you must decide do I stay at point B or do I pay to advance to point Z, at which time I have to make another Choice, do I pay to Access sub areas of X,Y and Z. Now we have more options. Do I pay to get C,D,E. Now more choices do I pay to unlock new functions, and races. Oh then even more choices, do I buy the new power pots, as they will be needed for some of the new content comming, cant run that instance without them.
So to me its like this. I like the I pay one price and get everything, instead of paying many prices to get some things. I don't like being nickled and dimed to death and that is what free to play is, another way to get at the cash I was not spending in the first place.
It is a win win for the company as they will get more dollars in the long run from folks who are willing to spend x dollars to go past A and get to Z, while buying a,b,c and all the other little goodies in between. They will make more money this way.
All free to play is at best is an Ala cart price restructuring, and they bank on you doing this.
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE.
It's still free even if there are optional items that you can purchase. A free concert in the park is still a free concert even if they are selling 5-dollar bottled water there.
There is water in nature that you can drink and still you buying water? So water is free? "Free to live" - "Pay to be healthy"; "Free to Login" - "Pay to Play" ( play !=i can jump, so i m playing)
I remembered one of my university profs...if you give any sample to make similarity to problem, he always used to yell "dont give me sample, descripe the problem fully nub!!"
Comparing a necessity of life to a virtual pet or stat boost in a video game... a valiant try and definitely an entertaining read.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What's really funny is all the fanboys who ran around ( and some still do ) spouting the "LotRO is in the top 3 of mmorpgs", only to disappear when it was pointed out to them that both the CEOs of Warner Brothers and Turbine stated in an interview just before LotRO F2P ( and while they were still saying there were no plans for LotRO to go F2P ) was announced that DDO was fifth (5th) in the market and LotRO was eighth (8th).
LOTRO was reported as 8th highest money making MMO by DFC Intelligence, which is a different statistic from subscription numbers. Most players and even industry people pretty much understood that when it came to subscriptions in the West, WOW was out front and EVE, WAR and LOTRO (and possibly AOC) were huddled in a muddled 2nd/3rd place pile up. However, if you still want to focus on money making MMOs, although not at all what 'fanboys' were 'spouting' about when discussing LOTRO being in third, of the Western MMOs that same article linked above shows LOTRO in 3rd.
Maybe people 'disappeared' because you might have come across as rather set in your views thus leaving little room for discussion.
Dont bother, they don't like facts around here.
Come on now, linking a "research" article from 2008 that ESTIMATES lotro revenue somewhere between $50-150 million dollars is hardly any more factual than the claims being made by others. That is the same exact range they used for club penguin, runescape, age of conan and warhammer. All of which have made million+ accounts/box sales/user statements. Something turbine has never claimed until DDO went free to play.
Just using ugly napkin math those figures would put lotro in 2008 somewhere between 833,000 and 277,000 subscribers [before revenue from box sales]. That sure seems like a wide margin of error in something that is being pointed to as a "fact".
So to me its like this. I like the I pay one price and get everything, instead of paying many prices to get some things. I don't like being nickled and dimed to death and that is what free to play is, another way to get at the cash I was not spending in the first place.
If you weren't going to spend the cash in the first place, then you fall into that 85% they aren't really focused on selling to anyway. However, it sounds like you'd enjoy DDO or LOTRO. Instead of paying $5-$15 every couple of months, you can get the same amount of content by paying one price... over and over and over and over and over again.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
So to me its like this. I like the I pay one price and get everything, instead of paying many prices to get some things. I don't like being nickled and dimed to death and that is what free to play is, another way to get at the cash I was not spending in the first place.
If you weren't going to spend the cash in the first place, then you fall into that 85% they aren't really focused on selling to anyway. However, it sounds like you'd enjoy DDO or LOTRO. Instead of paying $5-$15 every couple of months, you can get the same amount of content by paying one price... over and over and over and over and over again.
Actually I have a lifetime account, well vip account now to lotro. I quit playing ddo a long time back, and the free to play did nothing but turn me off. I am one of the few lifetime guys who actually will no be playing lotro now at all. I can see it for what it is a cash grab. I been watching as the content has drawn to almost a complete halt, compared to the old days of every couple of months getting something new. The last som xpac was bad and the new endawith zone is a joke.
I understood where all the new development was going trying to get more folks to join. Sadly Lotro has went to where I refuse to follow.
According to the best estimates I'm aware of, both LOTRO and EQ2 rank in the top 10 subscription MMOGs. So, it seems at least a bit curious to see them described as not meeting what those people expect of them, or worse. The degree to which such labelling is warranted is a matter of personal opinion, so no position is right or wrong in the absolute. But here again, further questions come quickly to mind.
Richard,
The relative position on a top ten chart does not in any way mean a game is doing well or not declining. There are so many things that could affect many games position on a list and could mean any number of things. I'm surprised you even tried to say something like this, especially in a market filled with so many poorly performing games. Being top ten is rather meaningless for mmos. Just look at some of the top 10 lists that articles by staff writers of mmorpg.com have created and how deep they have to dredge just to fill up 10 spots.
Soe has been putting off merging the eq2 for over 6 months now as the said they were going to do. Keep in mind soe is very very slow to react to the need for mergers. I'm not sure that there is a more clear sign of decline than server mergers.
Lotro is showing similar signs of retention problems. From deep deep discounts at retailers, amount of player winback promotions, slashing of subscription fees and in all honesty a change of revenue model all signal decline.
This isn't even including what players of the game feel is going on.
Sure nothing there are no subscription numbers released by either company, but it is pretty hard to ignore the information at hand and try to make it seem like these changes to free to play are somehow not related to declining subscription numbers. In a world where anything is possible we should look at what is plausible.
I personally think thatthe F2P approach is sinking in to Western Player's minds more and more, and the Industry has no choice but to follow its consumers.
part of the reason is that the original Easter F2P games, have evolved as well, and have found out what players like and what they do not in terms of mechanics in these games that are meant to generate income, since lets face it, these are businesses still after all, runnings ervers and staff still costs for a F2P game.
Yet the subscription and the initial cost of the game istelf has become an obstacle in and of itself.
So we shall see how things evolve.
- Duke Suraknar - Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard
Comments
Baseless fact, well I had to dig for it a while but here you go. The pruned the forums back in June. This got rid of a lot of post like letter from a lifer and others, and the ones that did get necroed well they been locked and let fall down to where unless you know what you looking for your not going to find it. All one had to do was visit the beta forums to see how upset folks were, and how many pages were getting locked, however I can only find one locked thread there now. So somebody been in cleaning mode.
Here is the forum purge post, and a lot of us thought this was done right after the merger with WB and since then they been heavy handed in the moderation. Like it or not it is happening.
http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.php?&postid=4673526#post4673526
For those who don't like clicking on links here is the cut and paste.
Forum Pruning 6/1/2010
The LOTRO forums will be pruned on June 1, 2010. Any thread that has not been active in the previous 90 days will be deleted. If you are aware of a guide, resource or other informative thread that should saved, you can do so by making a relevant post into that thread. This is not an excuse to bump any and every post. The community guidelines regarding bumping will still be in effect. Choose wisely!
Note: Sticky threads, the Hall of Fame, Postcards from Middle-earth, and the J.R.R. Tolkien forum will not be pruned.
Sapience - Community Specialist
"De facto, within the top 10, there can be eight at most that are doing well."
This is the ugliest sentence I've read in about a decade. Not only is that an improper use of the phrase "de facto," but the utterance as a whole is also blatantly false.
I'm sorry to nitpick, but when you use a Latinism on a goddamn GAMING WEBSITE, you should make sure you at least use it correctly. Who are you trying to impress, anyway?! Jesus Christ.
I am not exactly sure how three games (two of which are from the same company) could be considered a trend. That being said DDO was clearly floundering,(mostly do to some poor choices on the setting of the game) and the move to F2P has seemed to pick it up from the ashes. My conclusion is that Turbine thinks it can add onto its subscription base for LoTRO by moving it to F2P as well. As far as EQ2 is concerned it is in my opinion that Sony just wants to extend the life of its aging IP and boost the interest in its upcoming Everquest Next game.
This hardly constitutes as a trend. Although if either APB, AoC, CO, or STO follow their lead then we might begin to see a the beginning of a trend.
"Never pay more than 20 bucks for a computer game."-Guybrush Threepwood
"I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they've always worked for me."-Hunter S. Thompson
I'm seeing a lot of confusion and mis-labeling of games lately as "Free to Play" when they are in fact "Micro Pay" (Item Mall). A true "F2P" game means there is no fee to download or play, no "premium" items or Item Mall, but 100% FREE. Games like those on popular community sites such as Facebook and MySpace have free games, mostly those that are browser-based. You can also look at Pogo and even Yahoo Games as true F2P games. But games like DDO, VCO, etc are not really free to play since you are almost always required at some point to purchase something.
I have seen tons of these micro-pay games out over the years. Voyage Century Online, DDO, Atlantica, CABAL, the list goes on and on. The list is growing as well, and as noted by others here several popular subscription-based games are even moving to the micro-pay business model. Why? A lot of companies are seeing that micro-pay actually brings in more profits than subscription-based play.
Games with massive subscriber counts such as WoW don't need micro-pay, they have more than enough subscribers to keep the executive's wallets full. Other games, such as maybe SWG, are gradually falling in subscriber numbers but their game style just isn't suited for micro-pay. But if you can figure out how to get a "failing" game to work with the micro-pay business model, you actually might stand a good chance of reviving the profit intake enough that it could even surpass the previous subscription-based levels.
I'll use Voyage Century Online (VCO) as an example here. Sure, I've seen plenty of players who don't ever purchase Item Mall (IM) items or points directly, but I'd say that at least 75% or more of the players NOT purchasing those items/points themselves still purchase them from others using in-game currency as trade. The game is designed so that it's very difficult to advance far without at least a few IM items. That means that even when players are not purchasing the IM items themselves, by buying/trading the items from other players, those other players are still purchasing the IM for them.
And VCO even has plenty of "VIP" players, many of whom spend $3,000 USD and up per year. That's over $250 USD per month on average! Most non-VIP players might spend an average of $150-$300 per year on IM points, which averages out to about $12-$25 per month. So even though there are quite a few people who do not actually purchase IM points, the rest of the community (especially the VIP members) more than make up for the "loss". When you look at those points, you can see how games like VCO are making much more income via the micro-pay model than if they were to offer a simple monthly-based subscription. But then again, games like that were designed from the ground up as an Item Mall game.
There are also a few games that might be considered "middle-ground", those that offer both true F2P play as well as "premium" memberships. Runescape come to mind especially, which even on full membership only costs roughly $6 USD per month. The F2P game is of course limited severely when compared to the full membership benefits, but the cost of the membership is quite low when compared to other MMO's on the market. Their individual income might not be high per customer, but the sheer number of paying subscribers and low costs of development make up for the difference. This type of business model is a smart alternative to the micro-pay system, helping to attract non-paying players while still pulling in plenty of paying players as well.
I honestly can't see many of the "major" MMO's out there that are currently monthly-based moving towards the micro-pay model though. Games like SWG, EVE, WoW, etc just wouldn't convert well. The best they can do is to offer more items, more quests/missions, more content. Free expansions and updates, major upgrades to features, etc that will hopefully attract new customers and bring back veterans. Very few of the larger games are in danger of the micro-pay movement.
But on the other hand, I do forsee a lot more micro-pay games being developed soon. I'm currently participating in the betas of two micro-pay type games, and I'm aware of at least 3-4 others in development that will be released in the next year or less. Not to mention the countless number of micro-pay games being plopped out by the smaller Asian companies, which cater mostly to their local markets.
It's still free even if there are optional items that you can purchase. A free concert in the park is still a free concert even if they are selling 5-dollar bottled water there.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There is water in nature that you can drink and still you buying water? So water is free? "Free to live" - "Pay to be healthy"; "Free to Login" - "Pay to Play" ( play !=i can jump, so i m playing)
I remembered one of my university profs...if you give any sample to make similarity to problem, he always used to yell "dont give me sample, descripe the problem fully nub!!"
LF PvP game...for years...
Current: changing game everyday
Played: Shaiya, Aion, Perfect World(short time), Aika
Tried: EQ2, DAOC, LOTR, Atlantica Online...
Future: Any pvp game..couldnt found yet...
Rofl that's funny but true.
The problem is as follows.
Play to Play: For x dollars a month you get everything.
Free to Play For Free you get to point B, at that point you must decide do I stay at point B or do I pay to advance to point Z, at which time I have to make another Choice, do I pay to Access sub areas of X,Y and Z. Now we have more options. Do I pay to get C,D,E. Now more choices do I pay to unlock new functions, and races. Oh then even more choices, do I buy the new power pots, as they will be needed for some of the new content comming, cant run that instance without them.
So to me its like this. I like the I pay one price and get everything, instead of paying many prices to get some things. I don't like being nickled and dimed to death and that is what free to play is, another way to get at the cash I was not spending in the first place.
It is a win win for the company as they will get more dollars in the long run from folks who are willing to spend x dollars to go past A and get to Z, while buying a,b,c and all the other little goodies in between. They will make more money this way.
All free to play is at best is an Ala cart price restructuring, and they bank on you doing this.
Comparing a necessity of life to a virtual pet or stat boost in a video game... a valiant try and definitely an entertaining read.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Come on now, linking a "research" article from 2008 that ESTIMATES lotro revenue somewhere between $50-150 million dollars is hardly any more factual than the claims being made by others. That is the same exact range they used for club penguin, runescape, age of conan and warhammer. All of which have made million+ accounts/box sales/user statements. Something turbine has never claimed until DDO went free to play.
Just using ugly napkin math those figures would put lotro in 2008 somewhere between 833,000 and 277,000 subscribers [before revenue from box sales]. That sure seems like a wide margin of error in something that is being pointed to as a "fact".
If you weren't going to spend the cash in the first place, then you fall into that 85% they aren't really focused on selling to anyway. However, it sounds like you'd enjoy DDO or LOTRO. Instead of paying $5-$15 every couple of months, you can get the same amount of content by paying one price... over and over and over and over and over again.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Actually I have a lifetime account, well vip account now to lotro. I quit playing ddo a long time back, and the free to play did nothing but turn me off. I am one of the few lifetime guys who actually will no be playing lotro now at all. I can see it for what it is a cash grab. I been watching as the content has drawn to almost a complete halt, compared to the old days of every couple of months getting something new. The last som xpac was bad and the new endawith zone is a joke.
I understood where all the new development was going trying to get more folks to join. Sadly Lotro has went to where I refuse to follow.
Richard,
The relative position on a top ten chart does not in any way mean a game is doing well or not declining. There are so many things that could affect many games position on a list and could mean any number of things. I'm surprised you even tried to say something like this, especially in a market filled with so many poorly performing games. Being top ten is rather meaningless for mmos. Just look at some of the top 10 lists that articles by staff writers of mmorpg.com have created and how deep they have to dredge just to fill up 10 spots.
Soe has been putting off merging the eq2 for over 6 months now as the said they were going to do. Keep in mind soe is very very slow to react to the need for mergers. I'm not sure that there is a more clear sign of decline than server mergers.
Lotro is showing similar signs of retention problems. From deep deep discounts at retailers, amount of player winback promotions, slashing of subscription fees and in all honesty a change of revenue model all signal decline.
This isn't even including what players of the game feel is going on.
Sure nothing there are no subscription numbers released by either company, but it is pretty hard to ignore the information at hand and try to make it seem like these changes to free to play are somehow not related to declining subscription numbers. In a world where anything is possible we should look at what is plausible.
I personally think thatthe F2P approach is sinking in to Western Player's minds more and more, and the Industry has no choice but to follow its consumers.
part of the reason is that the original Easter F2P games, have evolved as well, and have found out what players like and what they do not in terms of mechanics in these games that are meant to generate income, since lets face it, these are businesses still after all, runnings ervers and staff still costs for a F2P game.
Yet the subscription and the initial cost of the game istelf has become an obstacle in and of itself.
So we shall see how things evolve.
Order of the Silver Star, OSS
ESKA, Playing MMORPG's since Ultima Online 1997 - Order of the Silver Serpent, Atlantic Shard