Every good game should be only P2P. Mainly because there is no F2P, nothing is free, there is ALWAYS price to pay, sooner or later. I agree on F2P on mediocre or average games. But for serious and commited playing and enjoyment .... P2P.
As far as I see it, the game shouldn't even be released or exist simply because of the fact that IT USES SWTOR'S ENGINE.
Seriously how the hell can you just reskin swtor and slap re-models of monsters to make it look elder scrollsish.
It's unprofessional of Bethesda and Zenimax and they should seriously be ashamed. The game is destined to fail just like every other crap MMO coming out to date, and we all know it.
If the game was to be f2p, it would be p2w, and thus nobody would play it, making the game still fail.
If it was p2p, people wouldn't play it because they feel it isn't worth the monthly fee.
Everyone wants things to be truly free and have no gimmicks, yet no company can do that or ever will, and thus these kind of things fail and die out.
If its not F2P it wont stay that way within a year after release. Easily the greatest dissapointed MMO announcement. I think a Tiddlywinks MMO announcement would get more positive feedback then this steaming pile.
Playing: GW2 Waiting on: TESO Next Flop: Planetside 2 Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
This is 2012, games are significantly less successful and make less money if they are not free 2 play.
There`s no mmorpg F2P. Period. It`s either with ad`s or item shop .. I hate item shop because it`s simply mean a minority of people are paying for some freeloader who never purchase anything.. and those same freeloader complain when the guy paying the bill have the advantage..
It`s for entertainement not a crucial thing. Everyone should pay the price or GTFO. It`s cost money to maintain a server with daily updating , support and maintenance. Nothing is free. Bethesda is not running a charity organization.
Those free dedicated server when you play counter-strike aren`t free either. It`s called donation and they`re 1/10000 the same magnitude has a mmorpg persistant server with 5000 people playing on it at the same time. I really hope it`s not F2P because I hate item shop or ad`s .
Honestly, if they are just going to be pulling a bioware and releaseing world of warcraft-wannabe with a elder scrolls skin, I'd rather them just cancel the game entirely. From the massive negative reactions its almost guarnteed the game is going to flop and its not even in beta yet, I think the company should just scrap it and save their dev budget for another fallout, or something, they'll probally be better off that way.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Admittedly, some of these people are quite vocal, but an individual who yells a lot and tries to make as much noise as five or 10 can is, in the end, still just one person.
While I agree with that statement Whole Heartedly, We have seen many times in many games in the last 10 years Astounding amounts of instances where the loudest voice is heard, not the majority voice, and changes are made around said Loud Voice. So Sadly it doesn't actually work that way.
To wrap up with a thought that may appear even farther out there, what if ESO were to come to market as both subscription and F2P? The two approaches are generally seen as mutually exclusive, but are they really? Is it impossible to use either model, or does it just seem unlikely because it would require thinking outside both the retail box and the metaphorical one?
Actually it could very well work, SOE Seems closest to that idea currenty. They still carry Subscriptions under the title Gold Membership, and The Free2play folks are Silver and Bronze Members. Alot of people even SOE call this model Free2play when really it is the hybrid called Freemium, and Freemium DOES work
When a game has a Subscription and a Free to play option both its not the same as an actual Free to Play(free download/free play game).
I consider games like Dungeons and Dragons Online for example Sub based games because a lot of the content is based around if you are a paying member. Same with Age of Conan. You can technically play them for free but doing so restricts you from certain things like Classes, Character Slots(DDO has 4 Fremium vs the 8 or 10 VIP/Paying char slots). You might also technically be able to unlock certain classes with things you earn in game in a free to play hybrid but its just easier to sub to the game to get some or just buy them.
This method i just spoke of isnt really Free to Play to me. Its more of a marketing plan that should be more considered Free to Try if you actually think about it. Take Age of Conan for example. Free players seem to have instances for the most part locked where as paying member's have access to all instances(providing they have the associated xpac). Some games take this farther with limited game currency(probably to combat gold farmers) limited bank/inventory space,and other features not offered to the free player base. Hence the term "Free to Try"
As far as The Elder Scrolls Online goes just like i have said in other threads i think i will wait until its a bit closer to launch and we have seen videos of its actual game play and what not before i pass judgement on anything concerning it. Also i think the success of Guild Wars 2 will heavily effect not only TESO but also any other games out or coming out in the future. If the Buy to Play model with an optional cash shop does really good other games will adapt to it and launch/convert to it themselves. Some games will also stick to the big box sales method and release recycled content over and over like always. Hard to say how TESO will turn out this early.
Every good game should be only P2P. Mainly because there is no F2P, nothing is free, there is ALWAYS price to pay, sooner or later. I agree on F2P on mediocre or average games. But for serious and commited playing and enjoyment .... P2P.
Good, so you agree TESO should be F2P.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Definitely too early to make decisions. Maybe when they have an actual alpha up and people have some idea of how the game is going to be set up. As is all of this is just speculation, no one knows anything about the game other than the title
the p2p model is dying, it's becoming archaic in design and function. GW2 is bringing out that fact with their pay model of B2P with cash shop. That is probably the best option for a new mmo now.
Definitely too early to make decisions. Maybe when they have an actual alpha up and people have some idea of how the game is going to be set up. As is all of this is just speculation, no one knows anything about the game other than the title
Try reading the big fucking spread they have on the game in GameInformer. We know a LOT more than just the title, and the game will be shit. The developers themselves confirmed it to be shit by making the mistake of opening their mouths and describing the game and its systems.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.- -And on the 8th day, man created God.-
If it's a good game make it pay-2-play. If it's bad then just don't make it at all. The market is overfilled with F2P MMOs that aren't worth the time to download much less play.
HELL NO. I know F2P is the new rage for mmo's but imo it's horrible. Take LotRO for instance (again, this is my opinion) used to be a respectable title but now it's a money sponge. Everything you do a window for the cash shop pops up.
Also I'd like to add, I'd pay 20.00+ a month for an immersive, solid mmo title with some sort of age verified server(s).
HELL NO. I know F2P is the new rage for mmo's but imo it's horrible. Take LotRO for instance (again, this is my opinion) used to be a respectable title but now it's a money sponge. Everything you do a window for the cash shop pops up.
Also I'd like to add, I'd pay 20.00+ a month for an immersive, solid mmo title with some sort of age verified server(s).
The hilarity of that, is that LOTRO costs about $80-100 for every single bit of content the game has to offer.
That being said, TESO is going to be a fail anyway, and will be just another game that sits around for years with some hardcore player base.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
I always support the B2P model over the F2P model, as it opens the door to people who would otherwise be turned off by the sub, but they still provide the game with a nominal charge to support the game overall.
Its sad that more companies don't choose to take advantage of this system in the MMO industry
the p2p model is dying, it's becoming archaic in design and function. GW2 is bringing out that fact with their pay model of B2P with cash shop. That is probably the best option for a new mmo now.
No, no and once again, no. Wrong.
"Becoming archaic in design and function"...? What the hell does that even mean?
By design, they're actually quite straight-forward, you pay a monthly sub, you get 24/7 access to the service for 30 days. In terms of function, they're a means of bringing in revenue for the developer, just like cash shops are for F2P and B2P MMOs.
Subscriptions are still a perfectly viable payment model as they've ever been for well over a decade now in MMOs, and for much, much longer with other types of products. People still pay subscriptions to magazines, internet service, cable service, smartphone/cellphone service and on and on and on. There's nothing "archaic" about them.
The world is never that black and white, and neither are payment models. Each payment model has a situation where it's better-suited for the job. None of them, F2P, B2P, or P2P, are a "one-size fits all" solution for all MMOs.
WoW remains a Subscription-based MMO, and is doing quite fine (no, having a free trial up to level 20 does not make it "F2P"; it makes it a sub-based MMO with a free trial up to level 20. I know the marketing says it is. That's why it's marketing). Final Fantasy XI is sub-based, and is chugging along. Final Fantasy XIV now has subs again and, despite the shape the game was in before, has a decently active player-base of paying players. RIFT has subs and is doing just fine. LoTRO, DDO and EQ1 and 2 both offer the equivalent of a subscription (Gold Membership, etc), which people still opt to use over the "freemium" approach. Dark Age of Camelot is still a subscription based MMO that, despite its age, still has people subscribed to it. And so on. Subscriptions are working just fine for those MMOs, and others I didn't list.
F2P/Cash Shops are pretty much here to stay, sure. That doesn't mean subscriptions are going anywhere, nor should they. They're a perfectly viable option that are better suited to certain game setups than the other options are.
HELL NO. I know F2P is the new rage for mmo's but imo it's horrible. Take LotRO for instance (again, this is my opinion) used to be a respectable title but now it's a money sponge. Everything you do a window for the cash shop pops up.
Also I'd like to add, I'd pay 20.00+ a month for an immersive, solid mmo title with some sort of age verified server(s).
Yeah I did quit :Lotro over that.
I tried I really tried.
I was VIP ,and I tried after F2P for months ,but could not bear that 95% of new cosmetic items were made for shop, that shop was plastered all over the game and UI, that more and more promises of what won't be in shop were broken, increasing grind(of course you could buy in shop instead of grind). Then store-exclusive settings , runes ,etc for weapons started to show.
Besides when I log in to game I really don't want to think about money and stuff , but that's kinda impossible in F2P or Freemium games (to be decided for B2P) , so...
No MMORPG should be free to play because it almost always has some degree to Pay to Win to it, and that is inherently bad. The only game I played where Free to Play did not lead to Pay to Win is League of Legends and that is not an MMORPG.
HELL NO. I know F2P is the new rage for mmo's but imo it's horrible. Take LotRO for instance (again, this is my opinion) used to be a respectable title but now it's a money sponge. Everything you do a window for the cash shop pops up.
Also I'd like to add, I'd pay 20.00+ a month for an immersive, solid mmo title with some sort of age verified server(s).
I will also gladly play 20.00+ month for such a title which is also, on top of what is mentioned above, enforcing of removing silly name and behavior which is not in context the virtual world.
A good B2p with an itemshop like GW would attract also more people.
On the other hand if they do a system like LOTR many people would also be in favor of that.
as many people that love GW and LOTR ..theres just as many that dont like it..hell i dont even consider GW much of an mmorpg....i dont like the b2p or f2p option..make it 10$ / 15$ a month with a box price of 45$ ..its about how much you would pay for a new xbox game 45+15 = 60$ ..if you dont like it..it looses subs ..that way we can keep track of the "good" mmo's and the "bad" mmo's ..cuz f2p / b2p model numbers can be rly deciveing , it could have a assload of sub ..but it could also be dead accounts and a horrid game
Actually, while you have a good point Richard, who actually cares? About ESO I mean. Its going to flop badly and remain a black mark on Bethsoft forever. F2P might actually be the only way it can survive.
Comments
No. It should and most likely will be B2P + Subscription fee.
Every good game should be only P2P. Mainly because there is no F2P, nothing is free, there is ALWAYS price to pay, sooner or later. I agree on F2P on mediocre or average games. But for serious and commited playing and enjoyment .... P2P.
As far as I see it, the game shouldn't even be released or exist simply because of the fact that IT USES SWTOR'S ENGINE.
Seriously how the hell can you just reskin swtor and slap re-models of monsters to make it look elder scrollsish.
It's unprofessional of Bethesda and Zenimax and they should seriously be ashamed. The game is destined to fail just like every other crap MMO coming out to date, and we all know it.
If the game was to be f2p, it would be p2w, and thus nobody would play it, making the game still fail.
If it was p2p, people wouldn't play it because they feel it isn't worth the monthly fee.
Everyone wants things to be truly free and have no gimmicks, yet no company can do that or ever will, and thus these kind of things fail and die out.
If its not F2P it wont stay that way within a year after release. Easily the greatest dissapointed MMO announcement. I think a Tiddlywinks MMO announcement would get more positive feedback then this steaming pile.
Everything you need to know about Elder Scrolls Online
Playing: GW2
Waiting on: TESO
Next Flop: Planetside 2
Best MMO of all time: Asheron's Call - The first company to recreate AC will be the next greatest MMO.
There`s no mmorpg F2P. Period. It`s either with ad`s or item shop .. I hate item shop because it`s simply mean a minority of people are paying for some freeloader who never purchase anything.. and those same freeloader complain when the guy paying the bill have the advantage..
It`s for entertainement not a crucial thing. Everyone should pay the price or GTFO. It`s cost money to maintain a server with daily updating , support and maintenance. Nothing is free. Bethesda is not running a charity organization.
Those free dedicated server when you play counter-strike aren`t free either. It`s called donation and they`re 1/10000 the same magnitude has a mmorpg persistant server with 5000 people playing on it at the same time. I really hope it`s not F2P because I hate item shop or ad`s .
Honestly, if they are just going to be pulling a bioware and releaseing world of warcraft-wannabe with a elder scrolls skin, I'd rather them just cancel the game entirely. From the massive negative reactions its almost guarnteed the game is going to flop and its not even in beta yet, I think the company should just scrap it and save their dev budget for another fallout, or something, they'll probally be better off that way.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
When a game has a Subscription and a Free to play option both its not the same as an actual Free to Play(free download/free play game).
I consider games like Dungeons and Dragons Online for example Sub based games because a lot of the content is based around if you are a paying member. Same with Age of Conan. You can technically play them for free but doing so restricts you from certain things like Classes, Character Slots(DDO has 4 Fremium vs the 8 or 10 VIP/Paying char slots). You might also technically be able to unlock certain classes with things you earn in game in a free to play hybrid but its just easier to sub to the game to get some or just buy them.
This method i just spoke of isnt really Free to Play to me. Its more of a marketing plan that should be more considered Free to Try if you actually think about it. Take Age of Conan for example. Free players seem to have instances for the most part locked where as paying member's have access to all instances(providing they have the associated xpac). Some games take this farther with limited game currency(probably to combat gold farmers) limited bank/inventory space,and other features not offered to the free player base. Hence the term "Free to Try"
As far as The Elder Scrolls Online goes just like i have said in other threads i think i will wait until its a bit closer to launch and we have seen videos of its actual game play and what not before i pass judgement on anything concerning it. Also i think the success of Guild Wars 2 will heavily effect not only TESO but also any other games out or coming out in the future. If the Buy to Play model with an optional cash shop does really good other games will adapt to it and launch/convert to it themselves. Some games will also stick to the big box sales method and release recycled content over and over like always. Hard to say how TESO will turn out this early.
Good, so you agree TESO should be F2P.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
Definitely too early to make decisions. Maybe when they have an actual alpha up and people have some idea of how the game is going to be set up. As is all of this is just speculation, no one knows anything about the game other than the title
twitch.tv/boonmackle
the p2p model is dying, it's becoming archaic in design and function. GW2 is bringing out that fact with their pay model of B2P with cash shop. That is probably the best option for a new mmo now.
NO! Simple as that.
Try reading the big fucking spread they have on the game in GameInformer. We know a LOT more than just the title, and the game will be shit. The developers themselves confirmed it to be shit by making the mistake of opening their mouths and describing the game and its systems.
-Letting Derek Smart work on your game is like letting Osama bin Laden work in the White House. Something will burn.-
-And on the 8th day, man created God.-
If it's a good game make it pay-2-play. If it's bad then just don't make it at all. The market is overfilled with F2P MMOs that aren't worth the time to download much less play.
HELL NO. I know F2P is the new rage for mmo's but imo it's horrible. Take LotRO for instance (again, this is my opinion) used to be a respectable title but now it's a money sponge. Everything you do a window for the cash shop pops up.
Also I'd like to add, I'd pay 20.00+ a month for an immersive, solid mmo title with some sort of age verified server(s).
The hilarity of that, is that LOTRO costs about $80-100 for every single bit of content the game has to offer.
That being said, TESO is going to be a fail anyway, and will be just another game that sits around for years with some hardcore player base.
My blog is a continuing story of what MMO's should be like.
I always support the B2P model over the F2P model, as it opens the door to people who would otherwise be turned off by the sub, but they still provide the game with a nominal charge to support the game overall.
Its sad that more companies don't choose to take advantage of this system in the MMO industry
No, no and once again, no. Wrong.
"Becoming archaic in design and function"...? What the hell does that even mean?
By design, they're actually quite straight-forward, you pay a monthly sub, you get 24/7 access to the service for 30 days. In terms of function, they're a means of bringing in revenue for the developer, just like cash shops are for F2P and B2P MMOs.
Subscriptions are still a perfectly viable payment model as they've ever been for well over a decade now in MMOs, and for much, much longer with other types of products. People still pay subscriptions to magazines, internet service, cable service, smartphone/cellphone service and on and on and on. There's nothing "archaic" about them.
The world is never that black and white, and neither are payment models. Each payment model has a situation where it's better-suited for the job. None of them, F2P, B2P, or P2P, are a "one-size fits all" solution for all MMOs.
WoW remains a Subscription-based MMO, and is doing quite fine (no, having a free trial up to level 20 does not make it "F2P"; it makes it a sub-based MMO with a free trial up to level 20. I know the marketing says it is. That's why it's marketing). Final Fantasy XI is sub-based, and is chugging along. Final Fantasy XIV now has subs again and, despite the shape the game was in before, has a decently active player-base of paying players. RIFT has subs and is doing just fine. LoTRO, DDO and EQ1 and 2 both offer the equivalent of a subscription (Gold Membership, etc), which people still opt to use over the "freemium" approach. Dark Age of Camelot is still a subscription based MMO that, despite its age, still has people subscribed to it. And so on. Subscriptions are working just fine for those MMOs, and others I didn't list.
F2P/Cash Shops are pretty much here to stay, sure. That doesn't mean subscriptions are going anywhere, nor should they. They're a perfectly viable option that are better suited to certain game setups than the other options are.
may be better
Yeah I did quit :Lotro over that.
I tried I really tried.
I was VIP ,and I tried after F2P for months ,but could not bear that 95% of new cosmetic items were made for shop, that shop was plastered all over the game and UI, that more and more promises of what won't be in shop were broken, increasing grind(of course you could buy in shop instead of grind). Then store-exclusive settings , runes ,etc for weapons started to show.
Besides when I log in to game I really don't want to think about money and stuff , but that's kinda impossible in F2P or Freemium games (to be decided for B2P) , so...
I left. Don't regret it.
'Buy to Play' would be the best option but, w/e...
Main MMO at the moment: Guild Wars 2
Waiting for: Pathfinder Online
No MMORPG should be free to play because it almost always has some degree to Pay to Win to it, and that is inherently bad. The only game I played where Free to Play did not lead to Pay to Win is League of Legends and that is not an MMORPG.
My gaming blog
I will also gladly play 20.00+ month for such a title which is also, on top of what is mentioned above, enforcing of removing silly name and behavior which is not in context the virtual world.
My gaming blog
as many people that love GW and LOTR ..theres just as many that dont like it..hell i dont even consider GW much of an mmorpg....i dont like the b2p or f2p option..make it 10$ / 15$ a month with a box price of 45$ ..its about how much you would pay for a new xbox game 45+15 = 60$ ..if you dont like it..it looses subs ..that way we can keep track of the "good" mmo's and the "bad" mmo's ..cuz f2p / b2p model numbers can be rly deciveing , it could have a assload of sub ..but it could also be dead accounts and a horrid game
F2P... screwing up one game at a time.
Actually, while you have a good point Richard, who actually cares? About ESO I mean. Its going to flop badly and remain a black mark on Bethsoft forever. F2P might actually be the only way it can survive.