TOR's problems had nothing to do with it's chosen payment model. It had to do with spending an INSANE amount of money to build a game that only a few people wanted to play for more then a couple of months.
If a game is realistic and disciplined about it's budget and engaging enough that players actualy WANT to play it over the long haul then it's payment model is pretty much irrelevent. Until the industry execs and talking heads get that straight in thier heads, nothing will change.
Contending that the payment model will make or break your game is the equivalent of saying that the flavor of the mints you leave on the pillow is what determines whether your hotel will be successful.
I'm going to be brutaly honest. The reason why so many MMO's have been floundering of late is because Developers just haven't been making very many good games lately, certainly not ones that have held peoples attention over the long term. The Development executives have been about as bad as Congress with fisicaly responsible budgets and sound management practices. Add to that the big publishers have been shooting themselves in the foot by essentialy treating thier customers like dirt and then lying to them pretty much every time thier lips are moving..... and a blind man could see what has been happening.
Make a good product. Be competent managing your production and budgets..... and treat your customers honestly and respectfully and you could pretty much throw a dart to chose your payment model.
It's the fundementals the industry hasn't been succeeding on....not chasing after trends created by thier own marketing spin-meisters.
I see ESO going down the same road as SWTOR, LOTRO, STO, DCUO, DDO, and others. A year or so with P2P and then a F2P switch or they might even go with GW2's B2P. There are only two games really holding on to P2P. EVE and WOW and I don't see them lasting too much longer without a F2P switch, but both Blizzard and CCP have other F2P and B2P projects out or coming soon. So I think EVE and WOW will just die P2P. Although I think F2P or B2P sequels for both games are coming in the future.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
First, I have to say this completely looks and feels to me like a sub based game. Second, your entire arguement is flawed by one statement, that there are many quality F2P games out there. I guess modern MMO PLAYERS don't even know what a quality game is anymore. There is nothing out like the original SWG, EQ, DAoC, etc... except perhaps EVE and that is a sub based game that is still thriving and making money. F2P is a sure-fire way to make sure no one cares about your game after the next 'wave' of MMOs are released. Sub gets deticated fans, IF you have a quality game, and keeps your game alive.
F2P to make a big splash, Sub to be a lasting game.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Because F2P games suck and get little development when they are F2P. Look at DDO and LOTRO, it takes them forever to get expansions and fixes because they do not have the money to pay developers.
Lol, right... maybe you should hop over to the LotRO forum and tell your thoughts above in the "New expansion already?!" thread where they complaining that expansions are coming so fast that they don't have enough time to finish everything on T2
Make sure you stay accurate. Keep in mind that from the initial launch of the last ex-pac to "FINALLY" getting all the instance cluster and final x-pac content into game took 9 months. They are not complaining that x-pacs are getting released to fast, they are complaining that x-pacs are being finallized to slowly with much of the content becoming irrelevant almost as soon as it gets introduced. Learn to read.
EDIT: as far as the payment model, it's irrelevant, if your game is good people will pay however they need to. If it sucks donkey balls well.. GL with that
Originally posted by volvoxaureus how about a subscription about 7 dollars/month ??
I agree with you. Make the subscription feel small, less than a Netflix subscription, have a cash shop that doesn't influence the outcome of PVP or PVE but more cosmetic in nature, and it could still work if the game is good and pumps out enough content. I think $5/month is a good compromise :-).
The real reason why F2P has had such draw lately is that there have been so many utterly underwhelming games released in recent years that gamers simply don't want to invest any money up front on something that has a 95 percent chance of being dissapointing. The hype can be off the charts, the (proffesional) critics can give it rave reviews but when you actualy get that bright shiny new Porche in your hands....it turns out to be a Yugo.
if i where to guess its is going to start as a sub and go free to play withen 6 month once they relise almost no one will play P2P games anymore exept hard core fans.
not that i am happy about this but this is probally the way it wil go i kinda hope im wrong but meh we will only know once the game comes out.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
Could the answer be.... both? Offer different tiers, including a sub model with access to most (if not all) content and then F2P models where you buy content packs, extra bag space, mounts etc?
I think hybrid with multiple options is the way of the future.
Of course that's not the answer, because it makes too much sense. Lol.
But then people will cry about how those kinds of models are p2w because they've seen about two people previously use the term.
Originally posted by Tokenaru I just dont get why you would want to be nickel and dimed instead of a subscription....its sick
You need to put it into persective.
1, a great many people don't pay anything because a small minority are willing to make up the extra money since the payment limit is uncapped for them.
2, some people are willing to, and can, pay more money if they can get a benefit out of it. The least being something cosmetic. The worst being getting ahead.
a, some people are very well off and paying a greater amount of money isn't really an issue to them. $1000 dollars to some is negligable and to others it's a great deal of money
b, some people shouldn't be paying more but they are compelled to so so because of thier own issues. I know a guy who has payed several thousand dollars in one of these games. His reasoning is that it's his main hobby so why not. He makes an "ok" salary so it "could" be a plausible argument. But maybe it's not to the thinking of others.
3, some people still only allow themselves the "$15 per month as that is what they budget for thier games. More or less depending on the month.
In the end it just depends on which category you see yourself.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I hope there is a monthly fee associated with Teso. I don't want a cash shop at all. Please please please please stop the madness of cash shops and just charge a monthly fee. Please
Subscription gaming is a thing of the First Generation MMO's and have no place in an MMO set in 2013-2014.
P2P games do have a place now, they just have to be freaking awesome! The only reason why P2P games do not have a place is when they are average / below average which has been the case for a few years now.
P2P is the best option, as you just get to play a game, and play to get stuff. Playing the game to earn an item is more rewarding than just buying an item.
SWTOR (the game being compared to in the article) was a better game when it was just P2P. Subbers actually got free gifts, and free content, now subbers have to pay for gifts, and more content on top of the sub
F2P like SWTOR has no place at all in MMOs, its nickle and diming at its worst
As long as the option exists for me to pay a monthly sub and get everything for the sub then thats fine by me.
As long as the option exists , that people not commited to the game can be excluded from my screen or party even better. If this is pay to win , or indirect F2P model this will sadly be yet another one for the bin.
People will always pay for a decent game , sadly cheap internet and free game access is providing a pool of seriously limited people , thank god lots of decent tactical RPGs are starting to be remade so that some of us will at least have a few decent games to play that requires more than one brain cell.
I love the elder scrolls franchise sadly , no more if we can't have a level playing field.
________________________________________________________ Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
TESO is going to launch as Pay to play. Unlike Wildstar on the surface TESO looks to have pay to play quality, it technically does but lacks the content and long term appeal to remain that way.
So expect this one to launch as a pay to play and in the not to distant future convert to buy to play or free to play/freemium model. I don't see a model as bad as SWTOR though when it does convert.
If they are not going B2P or F2P right from the start it will just end up being one in a very long line of failed P2P games going cheap and ruining it with a sudden F2P change over that isnt well thought out.
Go in with a B2P mindset now and have a good Cash Shop set up at release like GW2 did and maybe, just maybe you wont end up with 500,000+ TES fans that got suckered into buying the game thinking its an actual TES game getting royally pissed off at you and end up NOT getting TES6 when its released...and who knows, if you do it right, you may end up making far more than you thought you ever would.
This game has no chance of retaining most of its playerbase if it sells well, its the DaoC model and it isnt popular due to its gameplay limitations. Most MMO players have never tasted it, many have voiced they dont like closed off faction lands and its already well know what TES fans think of it.
They already shot themselves in the foot with the design model, why now take a shotgun and blow your leg off at the knee with p2p?
why? bercause from reading all these forums all these years i am convinced 75% of the people that play these games nowdays are bums, cheapos, users and abusers, out for the free ride and trash on everything they can, if it impedes their free ride , because each of those 75% are convinced they know it the best, they have the right answer, and they are the smartest.
it doesnt matter that any game, no matter how good, has to tie into a players inborn imagination to really become great in that players eyes.
most of us that started out playing 20 years ago also played things like dungeons and dragons, warhammer, ect.
nowdays lol most people dont even know what D&D really was or is, outside of the online line game for which it stands.
Articles like these are why I typically end up relying on other sources (websites) for information related to MMOs.
I don't care what model Elder Scrolls chooses - If its a good game that delivers on what's expected then odds are it will succeed. Sure the IP helps draw people in, but in the end as with any MMO the content AND its delivery is what matters.
If the UI is lousy (and unmoddable on top of that - if its a great interface then allowing mods won't matter as much), character responsiveness is horrible, or its seriously lacking in MMO staple features (e.g. it plays like a single player game, doesn't flesh out the guild/clan system, etc.), then odds are it will still fail, regardless of what its intended revenue stream is.
As pointed out by others, SWTOR was a horrible example. Most F2P MMOs I won't even touch to be honest - sure they may have a great point of entry and even be entertaining early on, but as soon as I see you need to buy X to enchant or power up Y and the only reliable way to get them is $ (plus an inherent chance of failure) ... odds are I go another direction.
If you truly can't afford the $15 a month, then I do feel for you, but let's be honest most other forms of entertainment can't come close (Netflix or w/e streaming service at ~$7 does beat it if you're into watching TV). I'd also hope if you don't have $15 of budgetable money per month, you're accessing these forums on someone else's device with someone else's broadband Internet connection.
SW:TOR couldnt sustain a subscription payment model because it was a really bad game. People beat the singleplayer portion of the game then quit rather than stick around for the horribly buggy and unfinished endgame.
A good article would have expounded on that rather than just say "subs failed for TOR which automatically means that subs will fail for ESO".
And to say that subscription based were always failing is just ....laughably bad. I dont even have the words to express how wrong that is. "Always a losing proposition" is definitive statement which means he's saying that WoWs subscription are a failure ....I mean ....really ...how can you
*brain explodes*
Yeah, the article is really just another in an increasingly obvious (and annoying) series where the authors are clearly trying to sell the idea that "P2P = bad; F2P = good".
Difference is, in most cases, they at least try to be somewhat subtle about it, so as to not show their hand.
MikeB, in this case, just cranks the 'rhetoric dial' to 11 and lets it fly. It reads more like a propaganda piece than an opinion column.
Subs have always been a losing proposition? Are you kidding me, MikeB? MMOs survived just fine on subs for over a decade, and some are still around longer than that, still charging subs and maintaining active playerbases. New MMOs are being released with subscriptions, and people are perfectly fine with that.
Many MMOs that go F2P maintain a "membership option" (aka "subscription"; a rose by any other name) for those who'd rather pay a flat monthly fee than deal with the nickel-and-dime, "pay as you go" approach of F2P/Cash Shops. A monthly sub option is still offered because there's still a demand for it.
Calling something a "failing proposition", when there's still a very clear and demonstrable demand for it, is one of the most blatant reality-distortion efforts I've witnessed in a long time. Some serious mental gymnastics at work there.
No P2P/Sub-based MMO has ever failed because of its revenue model. They fail - like any product - because they weren't good enough to maintain an adequate player/customer-base. Just like any service that requires a membership/subscription fee. You don't provide a good enough service, you won't maintain loyal customers - or at least not for very long.
Subscriptions are still popular. They're not going anywhere, nor do they need to. People, like MikeB, who keep perpetuating this myth that P2P/Subs are some horrible, out-dated thing, just need to snap out of it, let it go, and just be satisfied with the F2P options they already have.
Comments
TOR's problems had nothing to do with it's chosen payment model. It had to do with spending an INSANE amount of money to build a game that only a few people wanted to play for more then a couple of months.
If a game is realistic and disciplined about it's budget and engaging enough that players actualy WANT to play it over the long haul then it's payment model is pretty much irrelevent. Until the industry execs and talking heads get that straight in thier heads, nothing will change.
Contending that the payment model will make or break your game is the equivalent of saying that the flavor of the mints you leave on the pillow is what determines whether your hotel will be successful.
I'm going to be brutaly honest. The reason why so many MMO's have been floundering of late is because Developers just haven't been making very many good games lately, certainly not ones that have held peoples attention over the long term. The Development executives have been about as bad as Congress with fisicaly responsible budgets and sound management practices. Add to that the big publishers have been shooting themselves in the foot by essentialy treating thier customers like dirt and then lying to them pretty much every time thier lips are moving..... and a blind man could see what has been happening.
Make a good product. Be competent managing your production and budgets..... and treat your customers honestly and respectfully and you could pretty much throw a dart to chose your payment model.
It's the fundementals the industry hasn't been succeeding on....not chasing after trends created by thier own marketing spin-meisters.
When we get back from where we are going, we will return to where we were. I know people there!
First, I have to say this completely looks and feels to me like a sub based game. Second, your entire arguement is flawed by one statement, that there are many quality F2P games out there. I guess modern MMO PLAYERS don't even know what a quality game is anymore. There is nothing out like the original SWG, EQ, DAoC, etc... except perhaps EVE and that is a sub based game that is still thriving and making money. F2P is a sure-fire way to make sure no one cares about your game after the next 'wave' of MMOs are released. Sub gets deticated fans, IF you have a quality game, and keeps your game alive.
F2P to make a big splash, Sub to be a lasting game.
If I want a world in which people can purchase success and power with cash, I'll play Real Life. Keep Virtual Worlds Virtual!
Make sure you stay accurate. Keep in mind that from the initial launch of the last ex-pac to "FINALLY" getting all the instance cluster and final x-pac content into game took 9 months. They are not complaining that x-pacs are getting released to fast, they are complaining that x-pacs are being finallized to slowly with much of the content becoming irrelevant almost as soon as it gets introduced. Learn to read.
EDIT: as far as the payment model, it's irrelevant, if your game is good people will pay however they need to. If it sucks donkey balls well.. GL with that
I agree with you. Make the subscription feel small, less than a Netflix subscription, have a cash shop that doesn't influence the outcome of PVP or PVE but more cosmetic in nature, and it could still work if the game is good and pumps out enough content. I think $5/month is a good compromise :-).
There Is Always Hope!
if i where to guess its is going to start as a sub and go free to play withen 6 month once they relise almost no one will play P2P games anymore exept hard core fans.
not that i am happy about this but this is probally the way it wil go i kinda hope im wrong but meh we will only know once the game comes out.
F2P may be the way of the future, but ya know they dont make them like they used to
Proper Grammer & spelling are extra, corrections will be LOL at.
SUP
Of course that's not the answer, because it makes too much sense. Lol.
But then people will cry about how those kinds of models are p2w because they've seen about two people previously use the term.
You need to put it into persective.
1, a great many people don't pay anything because a small minority are willing to make up the extra money since the payment limit is uncapped for them.
2, some people are willing to, and can, pay more money if they can get a benefit out of it. The least being something cosmetic. The worst being getting ahead.
a, some people are very well off and paying a greater amount of money isn't really an issue to them. $1000 dollars to some is negligable and to others it's a great deal of money
b, some people shouldn't be paying more but they are compelled to so so because of thier own issues. I know a guy who has payed several thousand dollars in one of these games. His reasoning is that it's his main hobby so why not. He makes an "ok" salary so it "could" be a plausible argument. But maybe it's not to the thinking of others.
3, some people still only allow themselves the "$15 per month as that is what they budget for thier games. More or less depending on the month.
In the end it just depends on which category you see yourself.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
P2P games do have a place now, they just have to be freaking awesome! The only reason why P2P games do not have a place is when they are average / below average which has been the case for a few years now.
P2P is the best option, as you just get to play a game, and play to get stuff. Playing the game to earn an item is more rewarding than just buying an item.
SWTOR (the game being compared to in the article) was a better game when it was just P2P. Subbers actually got free gifts, and free content, now subbers have to pay for gifts, and more content on top of the sub
F2P like SWTOR has no place at all in MMOs, its nickle and diming at its worst
Star Trek Online - Best Free MMORPG of 2012
As long as the option exists for me to pay a monthly sub and get everything for the sub then thats fine by me.
As long as the option exists , that people not commited to the game can be excluded from my screen or party even better. If this is pay to win , or indirect F2P model this will sadly be yet another one for the bin.
People will always pay for a decent game , sadly cheap internet and free game access is providing a pool of seriously limited people , thank god lots of decent tactical RPGs are starting to be remade so that some of us will at least have a few decent games to play that requires more than one brain cell.
I love the elder scrolls franchise sadly , no more if we can't have a level playing field.
________________________________________________________
Sorcery must persist, the future is the Citadel
TESO is going to launch as Pay to play. Unlike Wildstar on the surface TESO looks to have pay to play quality, it technically does but lacks the content and long term appeal to remain that way.
So expect this one to launch as a pay to play and in the not to distant future convert to buy to play or free to play/freemium model. I don't see a model as bad as SWTOR though when it does convert.
If they are not going B2P or F2P right from the start it will just end up being one in a very long line of failed P2P games going cheap and ruining it with a sudden F2P change over that isnt well thought out.
Go in with a B2P mindset now and have a good Cash Shop set up at release like GW2 did and maybe, just maybe you wont end up with 500,000+ TES fans that got suckered into buying the game thinking its an actual TES game getting royally pissed off at you and end up NOT getting TES6 when its released...and who knows, if you do it right, you may end up making far more than you thought you ever would.
This game has no chance of retaining most of its playerbase if it sells well, its the DaoC model and it isnt popular due to its gameplay limitations. Most MMO players have never tasted it, many have voiced they dont like closed off faction lands and its already well know what TES fans think of it.
They already shot themselves in the foot with the design model, why now take a shotgun and blow your leg off at the knee with p2p?
buy to play, or subscription based
why? bercause from reading all these forums all these years i am convinced 75% of the people that play these games nowdays are bums, cheapos, users and abusers, out for the free ride and trash on everything they can, if it impedes their free ride , because each of those 75% are convinced they know it the best, they have the right answer, and they are the smartest.
it doesnt matter that any game, no matter how good, has to tie into a players inborn imagination to really become great in that players eyes.
most of us that started out playing 20 years ago also played things like dungeons and dragons, warhammer, ect.
nowdays lol most people dont even know what D&D really was or is, outside of the online line game for which it stands.
no loyaty
no retention
no responcibility
and internet anomnymity (sp?)
the four horsemen of the decline of the industry.
over 20 years of mmorpg's and counting...
Articles like these are why I typically end up relying on other sources (websites) for information related to MMOs.
I don't care what model Elder Scrolls chooses - If its a good game that delivers on what's expected then odds are it will succeed. Sure the IP helps draw people in, but in the end as with any MMO the content AND its delivery is what matters.
If the UI is lousy (and unmoddable on top of that - if its a great interface then allowing mods won't matter as much), character responsiveness is horrible, or its seriously lacking in MMO staple features (e.g. it plays like a single player game, doesn't flesh out the guild/clan system, etc.), then odds are it will still fail, regardless of what its intended revenue stream is.
As pointed out by others, SWTOR was a horrible example. Most F2P MMOs I won't even touch to be honest - sure they may have a great point of entry and even be entertaining early on, but as soon as I see you need to buy X to enchant or power up Y and the only reliable way to get them is $ (plus an inherent chance of failure) ... odds are I go another direction.
If you truly can't afford the $15 a month, then I do feel for you, but let's be honest most other forms of entertainment can't come close (Netflix or w/e streaming service at ~$7 does beat it if you're into watching TV). I'd also hope if you don't have $15 of budgetable money per month, you're accessing these forums on someone else's device with someone else's broadband Internet connection.
Yeah, the article is really just another in an increasingly obvious (and annoying) series where the authors are clearly trying to sell the idea that "P2P = bad; F2P = good".
Difference is, in most cases, they at least try to be somewhat subtle about it, so as to not show their hand.
MikeB, in this case, just cranks the 'rhetoric dial' to 11 and lets it fly. It reads more like a propaganda piece than an opinion column.
Subs have always been a losing proposition? Are you kidding me, MikeB? MMOs survived just fine on subs for over a decade, and some are still around longer than that, still charging subs and maintaining active playerbases. New MMOs are being released with subscriptions, and people are perfectly fine with that.
Many MMOs that go F2P maintain a "membership option" (aka "subscription"; a rose by any other name) for those who'd rather pay a flat monthly fee than deal with the nickel-and-dime, "pay as you go" approach of F2P/Cash Shops. A monthly sub option is still offered because there's still a demand for it.
Calling something a "failing proposition", when there's still a very clear and demonstrable demand for it, is one of the most blatant reality-distortion efforts I've witnessed in a long time. Some serious mental gymnastics at work there.
No P2P/Sub-based MMO has ever failed because of its revenue model. They fail - like any product - because they weren't good enough to maintain an adequate player/customer-base. Just like any service that requires a membership/subscription fee. You don't provide a good enough service, you won't maintain loyal customers - or at least not for very long.
Subscriptions are still popular. They're not going anywhere, nor do they need to. People, like MikeB, who keep perpetuating this myth that P2P/Subs are some horrible, out-dated thing, just need to snap out of it, let it go, and just be satisfied with the F2P options they already have.