Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
General: Why the F2P Trend Wont Last
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
In our latest Devil's Advocate column, MMORPG.com Managing Editor Bill Murphy takes a look at one of the hottest topics in the MMO universe: The F2P market. While it appears an unstoppable juggernaut, Bill doesn't think the F2P trend will last. Find out why and then let us know what you think in the comments.
I realize this particular case of The Devil’s Advocate column comes at a time when World of Warcraft is reporting a massive loss in subscribers during 2011, and analyst firms are reporting a huge increase on F2P spending in North America. But I (Satan) see this as less of a sign of F2P dominance, and more as a sign of a diverse market for all MMO gamers. We’re also seeing one of the industry’s biggest F2P players showing signs of too-rapid growth while being forced to make drastic layoffs.
Read more Devil's Advocate: Why the F2P Trend Won’t Last.
)
Comments
You're spot on looking at quality. If you can sell your product you don't give it away. Period.
I think that these games are falling way short of their potential to make money with their item shops. That's partly because most of the ones that go F2P are terrible, and not enough people want to spend anything on them, but it's also because they're failing to find a good balance between F2P and P2W - I'm not advocating true pay-to-win cash shops here (now that'd be devil's advocacy) but I do think they need to offer more in terms of little boosts and advantages that help leveling and the like, to make real money.
I think they also fail to offer enough by way of customization to give people anything they want to pay for in that department too, though - but I suspect that alone won't make enough for any serious game, even at its best.
Anyhow, I think that this is the crux of the trend, and whether they find that balance or not will make the difference between the trend taking over, or just fizzling out.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Eh wanna bet?
I know there's a lot of forum trolls who don't care / understand F2P. Still, it's just how these games are going to have to progress.
Buy to Play / content ala carte - is the only way forward.
I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.
Devil's Advocate article or not, I don't see F2P as taking over the market.
The MMO industry has been experiencing a bubble over the last several years, not unlike the dotcom bubble. Investors saw potential in making a lot of money after seeing WoW's success, and poured money into the industry. They did so however, for developers and games that were poorly thought out and had scope and/or design direction issues.
This bubble has been taking longer to burst due to the longer development cycle inherent to MMOs, but it has been bursting. We've seen a lot of MMOs closed, or go F2P. Many that have gone F2P are even struggling to stay open still. It's not a matter of F2P being "better" than P2P, simply that many of these games that were originally P2P were never good enough to justify being P2P.
As the market levels out and the bad MMOs are shed from the current generation of the market, we'll see more focus back on the real P2P games. The P2P games where you're happy to pay a monthly fee for because you're actually getting a good quality gaming service in return.
That's not to say that F2P is going to dissapear. It will still have it's place, but it will shrink back to where it was five years ago.
It’s a good article, and I do agree with you on most of these terms. People quit wow because it’s really getting old now, and there are other very good offers around the corner. Such as Diablo 3, SW:TOR, GW2 etc .. Having 10 million subs 7 years after launch is in my book beyond impressive.
BUT this:
Seven years is a long time, and with other studios finally beginning to catch up in terms of quality product (Rift, SWTOR – we hope) – Rift? you can seriously have played this game. I played it since launch and until August. I quit because they just copy-paste everything from other games or even worse they copy-paste their own events. When you start the topic of quality, don’t bring in Rift, that’s a good example of a non-quality game that is slowly dying.
While success in some, sorry, idiots book is according to numbers of subscriptions then it’s hard to be successful on the MMO market. But there are products such as niche products and that’s where I see the strength in SW:TOR – It can be a seriously good MMO for maybe 1-2 million subs, while the starting might be 5+ millions. But this game talk to a hardcore SW fan, story and everything. Kinda like Lotro did in the start.
Yeah..uhm...no. Not a trend. I for one am sick and tired of subsidizing Raid-play and other gameplay that I never participate in. For too long raids have eaten up dev time and taken away dev time to create these design-intensive dungeons at the expense of a larger majority of players.
And if you think Raids are so popular, then there's a perfect way to test their popularity: f2p and ala carte purchases of that content. If it can't sustain itself, then we'll know for sure it isn't worth it.
Your only half right F2P and P2P are both on the edge now. Game company new plan is hybreed of P2P/F2P AKA double dipping. Look at 95% of P2P now they charge to real money to change a server or change a name . 75% F2P are now putting in VIP memberships AKA sub's with there cash shop. The golden age of MMORPG games have been over for around 5 years maybe a little more. Yes there maybe more people playing games now but at the same time there made easyer and easyer. All new games coming out and all copy and paste with a new skin and a vary slight change in 2 or 3 things.
I am not going to go in to it since it dose nobody any good and makes me sad. The best thing for MMORPG online gaming right now is for a crash where no company will invest in MMORPG's for atleast 10 years and only small companys with little money make games. Where they take risk and fully reshape things the way they want them to be. To the point where we have all the things games used to have back when UO SB DAOC ran the things.
1. People who disagree with you and your views are not 'trolls'... they just don't agree with you.
2. Explain, when ton of sub games have proven to be vastly profitable, why MMORPGs 'have' to go F2P to 'progress' and why it is the 'only way forward'?
What actual improvement in game play has F2P actually brought to gaming? How has it improved or moved games forward as a revenue model?
(As a side note, I do find it interesting that you delivered a mass insult, designed to flame an argument, and then an unsupported opinion with no substance and then you consider others 'trolls')
I agree, change has to come from the grass roots.
The trouble is though that MMORPGs are far from suited to grass root indie development, especially when they are expected to launch by the mass market as an ultra polished fully featured gleaming product.
The general user base has no tolerance for supporting imperfect Indies, and the Majors in general have no tolerance for making innovative interesting games that might be a risk (prefering to sink their budget into 100% profit cash shops). It' eay to ee how we have ended up here.
TBH we can't even blame the Devs... the customer base gets the games they show that they want with their money. It's our fault, no one else's. When all your buying is Justin Bieber you can't complain music is shit.
For the first time in 5 years i am no longer subscrided to any P2P titles as i am horror of horrors a casual player and with work and family commitments unable to justify paying 2 subscriptions (stationpass and Rift) so i am now enjoying a couple of freemium titles which i have spent a very small amount. As i just play through the games rather than raid or pvp having the best eqpt is not a major worry. Up until now i would never have gone the freemium route i dont like the term f2p as nothing is free in the long run. So i can understand the reason for this article especially with hardcore gamers
You have pretty much hit the nail on the head. If companies would call (market) it under any name WITHOUT that "free" word in it, then maybe I could take it as something legit. At the moment, I see "f2P" as a scam that everyone else just has not awakened to as of yet. Those that are still subscribing and those that are buying from the "in game store" are the one subsidising those that wish to play for free. With real money! No, nothing is free and we the gamer should never be snookered by fast talking marketing people to believe it is otherwise.
Let's party like it is 1863!
I don't really see the drop off in WoW sub numbers as relevant (to even be mentioned here).
You have two factors (in my opinion) and those are:
1) Economy
2) People finally are hitting /cancel when a developer pisses them off.
Free to Play only sounds good on paper because you can hit a wider market. Why? because there is no entry cost.
The problem after that is free player to pay to play-player ratio.
Even if you managed to have a 50% ratio which I think is unlikely. The 50% that pays anything has to spend at least $30 a month to compare to a subscription game. Unless you are able to prove that the game has at least 100% more players than if it was subscription based. Even then all you have done is... reach the same income the subscription game had at half the population.
I believe the industry will try it... and it will fail or at best give them the same outcome they already had. So then the hybrid model which to me makes even less sense. Personally I don't have much interest in paying a subscription and having a cash shop. Maybe people are ok with it.. I dunno it just seems unlikely, but I obviously have no data to back that up.
As to the MMO industry this is how I look at it:
1) Games on average launch almost as badly as they did in 1997/1999. Rift was an exception but then it had other problems. The issue here is as Devs or forum posters try to defend the disaster of launch... I don't care and I doubt most consumers care about what they post. At some point you are no longer inventing the wheel and the process should move forward. If my bank or any other major daily transaction server I use was down as much as the average MMO... I would no longer do business with them. I mean people talk about Comcast or Charter (as a couple of examples) being bad ISP's... but even at my worst with either.. their downtime was non existant in comparison to an MMO and they certainly move more traffic a day than any MMO I play.
2) While I understand the reality of investors and wanting to actually make money on that 100 million dollars and change.. that some company spent (of the investors money). Playing it safe is no longer going to pay off in the MMO world. This is simply due to the fact that you can only play a game so many times... repackaging it and renaming it doesn't change it. Been there, done that, bought the tshirt and already left. At least one upcoming game mentioned in the article at the start of this thread... suffers majorly from this issue.
3) No one from the company or development team should be allowed to make any public statements or forum posts without someone with a brain approving it. George Z is my favorite poster child currently ... every company has someone like this (blizzard had a few). "we don't owe you anything... but you should buy our crap in this really bad economy because you owe us" is the mentality that often is spewed by these people or "well if you don't like it nobody is forcing you to be here."
Can you imagine if share holders could hold company employees liable for the money they cause them to lose? This may sound kind of meh but really? When you are tying to sell an optional product in a crappy economy or even a good one... it might be best to keep your mouth shut sometimes. Simply because if I buy a product and run into an issue and I get irritated and then someone with your companies tag runs their mouth... it doesn't cost me anything to quit. Yet its lost income for a company that is trying to make money. SOE is a pretty good poster child for this concept as well.
Oh and the point was... instead of actually looking to see why people quit or more people don't join... companies would rather discuss going F2P or a hybrid model. Simply because obviously people want to spend even more on a game they won't pay a subscription for (um ya cuz the F2P model relies on someone paying more.. to make up for the freebies). It would make more sense to get rid of the box price and keep the subscription.
*edit*
Sorry for the wall of text. What I'm talking about here is really only from the business perspective. I totally understand the consumer perspective. I just *ponder* that any of these companies actually end up making more from people supposedly paying less.
Depending on how Cash Shops are handled, players may end up paying more for a so-called F2P game, than they do for a P2P game. I for one still prefer P2P since it's commonly better in quality. While this may not be true for all P2P games, I'd rather pay €13 a month for a P2P game, than end up having to pay twice that amount for so-called VIP memberships and cash shop items. On top of that, those who buy stuff from cash shops in F2P games are often looked at as 'Elite'. (And if not, some will likely act as such) While in a P2P game without any VIP memberships or Cash Shop items, everyone is pretty much equal from the start. And I am the sort of person to strive for equality in such a community.
Rift may not have been revolutionary from a gameplay standpoint, but what the game does, it does very well and very polished. Trion also churns out content for the game like I've never seen a developer do before.
Yes I've played Rift, and yes I admit that I quit. Not because the game was bad or flawed, but simply because it was a "been there, done that" to me because I'm burnt out on themepark MMOs in general due to having played 6 years of WoW prior. But I don't fault the game for my own burn-out, it is still a decent game for what it tries to be, and from what I've seen they've been expanding on the game very rapidly.
Rift is a good example of a P2P game done right, despite what some people want to believe.
Every game losses subs at some point for a variety of reasons. F2P gives those companies a shot at a 2nd wind so to speak. Several have been successful like LOTRO and D&D Online.
***Raving Rabbid shows Aragorn and Arwen how to Dance!***
All my opinions are just that..opinions. If you like my opinions..coolness.If you dont like my opinion....I really dont care.
Playing: ESO, WOT, Smite, and Marvel Heroes
I'd rather pay for a game that has quality and content backed by a solid company, rather than play a free game that lacks the basic things that make an mmo succeed.
I don't sit in while you're running it down; I don't carry a gun... I drive.
Really this is not a "Devil's Advocate" position at all, its the truth.
There is a market for both types of games, I like subscription based games personally but thats just me. The free to play games I have tried all lack something, there is fun to be had but not for any length of time.
If you build a quality game you can go with a sub model, if you build a game that is eh,OK/mediocre F2P might be your best option.
You forgot the option of:
* Box up the game, and sell the box.
* Charge a subscription.
* Wait for the game to tank.
* Make a F2P announcement and generate renewed interest in the game.
* Make more money than you were when the game tanked.
Game companies are getting money from both ends of the spectrum and they are doing it with games that are pretty low quality.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Meh. Not sure what to think. Of all my friends playing MMORPGs right now, none of them are playing a F2P game. Every single person I know tries them for a week or two, then walks, never quite happy.
For me, games that are F2P always have the feel that something is lacking. Maybe it's just my own dislike coming through.
Now, GW2 I put in a different class. Buying the original box at a premium to pay for the production value you are getting is a whole different animal than say, Allods.
People complain about the issues of not having a flat rate subscription, but I think it's that very flexibility which can make F2P so successful.
One way F2P games can be superior is that its easier for them to deviate from a standard ($15/mo sub) depending on how well the game's been recieved. A good AAA game could try to get $10-20/mo from the average player, while a more mediocre game could do better aiming for $5/mo. I think that flexibility can help everyone, from users who seem to almost enjoy shelling out as much as they can, to those that prefer to make sacrifices to play for as little as possible, as well as publishers that have a highly valued AAA game to milk, and those that can gently nickle and dime players of an unpopular little game not many people will be willing to pay much of anything for - they won't make much, but they'd make more than they make being on the verge of shutting the servers down, when so few are willing to pay a full sub.
I think one of the trickiest parts of all this is for the publisher to accurately assess the value of their game. Too many of them overvalue, thinking they can get at least $15/mo, when they couldn't get away with that as a sub fee. So they go freemium, and end up with a cash shop not many are willing to spend anything on, either. Once the initial F2P hype dies down.
This flexibility only works when they accept whatever revenue the market will realistically get them, longterm. It might look bad to accept just a few bucks a month from the average player, compared to the $15 standard, but when they end up with way more players by doing that, I think they can make more money that way. OTOH, AAA games that aren't having a problem getting $15 a month could probably make even more, because the F2P model can bring in so many more players. They could end up with a thriving game, with much better longterm retention, if they stop demanding a sub. They can still make an average of $15 if they handle the cash shop well, but in my estimation, they could get that ~$15 from a much larger customer base.
The only MMO that probably does better without any of this is WoW. I bet every other MMO, including upcoming mega-AAA titles like TOR, could make more money, if they did it this way, right off the bat.. and that's why I think the trend might not only last, but become standard. If, and only if, they start making the most of it.
When I want a single-player story, I'll play a single-player game. When I play an MMO, I want a massively multiplayer world.
Here is where so many fail. NO ONE wants to do the math. If you pay every 3 months for htose crappy 45 games at wal mart. or a full $50 retail every 6 months (normal, add or reduce according to your ability to play / pay).
Now, look at subscription like WoW $15 that has not changed. That is $145 a year (not inclulding content and other goodies).
F2P: $0 The difference is the goal of the publisher. Is it to punish you in end game pvp? IS it to make dungeons imposible without gear to pay to upgrade? Is it holding back content to be released with pay? or is it play, then level cap, then sub or quit?
- That there, is the DECISIONS of the publisher. That is not the VITALITY or the REALITY of the state of the game. Most games that launched with a box price (WoW, Lord of The rings, etc..) PAID FOR ITSELF x10 over, and your sub is just cream on the cream. It is just to please investors. It is to pay off a boat loan to the Bahamas. Sadly, to determine the intent if each company, you need to do some home work. It is no longer *pick up box, ike pictures, try game*. Don't want to go that deep? Ask yourself then: 'What do I want / put up with?"
WoW, and other sub games, like SWOTR, will be a nice box purchase, if you think it is worth $145 for 1 year is your choice, but comparing it what you can do, it might not be. For example. WoW lv 1-around close to end game, around 20 levels to end game, so say lvl 60, is nothing but quest grinding with dungeon grinding. How is this different than other games? It is not, so, do you want to spent $145 a year for a game you can get for free for $0? This is where we have to go directly to END game: Before we do, SWOTR, it is going to be the same, you will pay perhaps, for the story telling experiene of the star wars galaxy, but under the hood, you are just raising numbers on character to get to that end game positions. So lets get to what ALL MMORPG's are;: END GAME CONTENT:
AGain, all games first levels, at this point, should not be paid for. THAT is marketing trick. Lock them in to pay and play until "damn, its over, im tired, im bored, im taking a break'... typical story of all gamers. Then they see their credit cards are attached so they log back into wow for another round. So, lets look at what you have foolishly paid for, the end game content:
PAy to Play: End game WoW, SWTOR, EQ2, etc.. all are/were pay to play, OR you cannot tap into that end game goodness without subing or paying something. So, Wow has a pvp system actively paid for to monitor closely and gets reset, ative patches, etc.. they have dungeon systems and epic quests. For example, there is a new legendary quest system that makes you go into dungeons and farm them. The dungeons are denied access after two attempts, and reset weekly. This feature people think is what they pay for. For dev's to reset and manage their game for them. Somehow in their mind they think it balances game and is "anti bot" that "plagues the F2P" market. LOTR has content acively coming out that their subers thinkt hey pay for "It is worth the invetment to get more content". SO... If I understand right, the difference between wow, and LotR is that wow you have paid since noob level doing THE SAME things you could do for free, only to continue to pay for end game management (that usually benefits the SUPER dedicated, I am talking unemployed playing with welfare money).
MEanwhile LOTR and others like the hybrid model, offer your noob time free, and then you can invest if you want that gate lifted between you and the level cap "fun" which ends up the same thing yuo have been doing, just new story, so you are paying for the story experince. INwow, you can ditch the last 20 levels of lore, story, quests and go right into dungeon farming to get higher levels and better xp, adn better EQ. T
Now, the F2P: $0, same content, same quality, same everything, now the pay to win armor at the end: The content is free, the story, the dungeons, everything is free. To really deat that boss, the guild needs you to have +9 armor. Which cannot be crafted without the cash shop gaurantee scroll. Ok, $20, 1 time. (depending on game,, this is average). BAM, you pay less than a full box release, you pay once, you continue your end game exploration. PEople go and cry that it is pay to win (on their Iphone posts LOL), and then F2P gets a bad wrap. F2P should be renamed Free to Play Till the End: FTPTTE.
Again, maybe there is apublisher that just gives content such as League of LEgends, everything is free, except private servers and some xp boosts (not game breaking, and the servers are for competitve guys that are super serious). ALL free best $0 full content game. Ok, it is not a large consistant world to manage, so lets move on. Other games, that offer all free except that passage into the next realm (ragnarok, etcc) where all the other players are hanging out. Some offer 1 time purchase, others want a sub. But at $3 a month of $5. In one year, you pay 1 PRICE OF A RETAIL BOX with a F2P subscription.... Seems fair right? BECAUSE IT IS!!! No one does the math.
Where you ALL FAIL: So, with a world full of consumer morons who do not study, just consome and buy into imgaes (More people purchased Star Craft2 AFTER they released WoW art in the stores, 3 months into the release it was slow selling, after the ARTISTIC posters, it sky rocketed... BUT THE GAME LOOKED AND HAS NO WOW ART IN IT)!.
Any ways, yes, so if yu do the math you will see the Pay to play is a full on crooked crook comany with egotistical leaders who are firing each other, building big offices, hosting large events, over pricing so much (like that homemade "sword" that sells for $200 to hang over your bed). But the quality is the same as everything out there. Before, arguably, yes, finding afree game with good graphics, gamepla etc.. was hard. Now, the market is FULL. It is not difficult either. LVl 1,,,,lvl 100. End game. Kill X wolves, clear X dungeons. Come on people, you dumb wow heads keep thining somehow the developers come to your house to feed you, burp you, and wipe your ass. But the fact is, server is a server. Game is a game. IT is all teh same, just depends on teh sucker. consumer.
Best example, All my accounts on different credit cards, diferent pcs, and different emails, and IN DIFFERENT countries for have been broken or poorley serviced through Blizzard, and battle.net. I quit qoq about 5 years ago, and I Still recieve notices about how my account is constantly bieng hacked. Or, on a differnet accoutn from a different pc, while i was in colleg ein EUrope, I get messages from last year saying my account is compromised. LOL! All this and I have payed for. In the free to play market. I NEVER had an account problem. And in Perfect World (I hate this game), I even shared my account with a guild of strangers. 2 years later, I checkup on it. It is fine, not hacked, and I changed the password and just recouperated it. (But I dont play.) In cnclusion, YOU DO NOT PAY FOR BETTER SERVICE IN PAY TO PLAY, GET IT OUT OF YOUR DUMB HEAD!
the only bad of Free to play: The publisher can abuse it like in perfect world. AGIAN THE END GAME: PWE has a way of putting high prices on items that "Run out" (charms) and you will need them constantly. The math comes out to more than a subscription game. You do not have to, but the end game will not be enjoyable without it. So. DO THE MATH:
In conclusion:
1.) DO THE MATH
2,) ASK WHAT YOU WANT in ENd GAME
3,) DONT BUY THE HYPE THAT YOUR PAY TO PLAY IS BETTER DO TO MAGICAL ADMIN READY TO COME TO YOUR HOSUE AND CARRESS YOUR PEEPEE.
PErsonally I quit wow after vanilla died. I always thought "I will find that one game to get hooked to and be dedicated to. But like mommies titties, you have to stop sucking to grow.
I get around, for space sci fi feel, I play Gamigo's Black prophecy. Great game! cash shop doesnt hurt it, Gamigo has good cash shop models.
For that fantasy feel with pvp, League of legends. It is great! For straightup fantasy, I have several lvl 40's in different games. If I want that classic feel, I am playing Legend of Edda. For that 3d feel, I play some other games like Regnum (RvR), or Prius. Check out other sites like mmohut, mmobomb, etc.. get several sites going for reviews. Dragon nest is a great game for some hack n slash fantasy. This way, you are ALWAYS equiped with a sword, in different games, taking out that fantasy rage on monsters. And how much do I pay? $0. I paid $40 max on RUnes of Magic to get a mount and some extra things for fun. I felt very comfortable because I felt the company deserved it. They kept me hooked for 6 months! Do I play now? NOPE! I have an account though, and If I feel like max level out, I Will go back to by 40/40 Warrior/priest. They have a new 3rd class sytem I have not discovered. YOU SEE??? I HAVE GMAING OPTIONS! for free!!! Your wow turds have uhhh... PANDAS to look forward too BWAHAHAHAH! enjoy the fail folks. Stay smat.
Let's talk "economics": F2P (or, better, the hybrid/freemium model) is much more viable because it expands the possible target audience and lowers break-even times.
Allows people to spend "less" on "more" games letting more companies survive. But it doesn't change the fact that a company should give something to the customers to get their money, especially with all the competition out there.
F2P can be a "smart" move for a not-so-well-developed game (DCUO, CO), or a move to broaden and refresh revenues on an old game (COH), but nonetheless all games still have to give players something valuable to have them pay for the service.
I agree comletely. Let the market decide not just whoever complains loadest in the forums.
It would be real interesting to see an article on what kind of content really is selling in these games.
I think that's a marvelous idea. I too am fed up with dev time being taken up by design intensive raids while the rest of the content is left unworthy and/or only serves to usher in everyone to raids. I also agree that the pricing model you stated would work out for everyone's benefit.
EDIT: let me clarify what I think would work -
Box sale = $50-$60
Monthly Sub = $10-$15
Cash shop for Raid content = Variable*
Free Expensions
Well theres always gonna be a market for f2p/p2p...
I have always played a sub-based mmo, simply because they where MUCH better in my opinion. The only f2p mmo that was any good to me was Forsaken World and Allods Online. Only game that cought my attention for more then 2 monthts, but then that was it.
Rift i play once in a while, because the game simply feels like ive been there and done that. They game ir REALLY good, but i want something different.
Im putting my hat on SWTOR mainly and GW2(Simply cuz its frree to play)