I was subscribed to swtor b4 it went f2p the day it went f2p I quit reason I quit is cause well I realized to be a f2p player you would end up spending 3 times as much just to get the benefits of 1 person with a sub on the same game , I have played over 100 f2p mmo's over the last 5 years all to notice 1 huge problem with them lack of content , all only have pvp to actually look forward to , also be prepared to spend 20$ - 50$ a month just to stay on par with the rest of the competition ..
that being said I prefer the p2p model over all the mmo game models on the market
"Just about every new release is F2P in some form and even games released subscription-based have been making the switch at a breakneck pace."
They didn't see the light, or become wise to the F2P system.. Some were just simply a failed game..
Sw:ToR - Practically nothing to do at max lvl, crafting system is next to useless, I quit after getting max lvl in 5 days, wasted £45 on this. Bioware should have stayed solo, not included EA, they have no idea how to run an MMO, and they eat companies.. Maxis, now Bioware, and probly others too.
The Secret World - Went F2P the second it came out of beta.. Why?.. Not enough interest, now you buy the game, and it's F2P.
I'd rather there be an option to sub. I've got so many games (MMO's) I like to play that I hate having to choose which one I'll sub to just so i can play it for a few hours a week. F2P is fine with me.
10 people play a P2P MMO, they all pay $15 = $150.
10 people play a F2P MMO, 7 of them never spend anything 3 of them end up paying $50 each. = $150
You simply CANT have all 10 people pay $0....then there wouldnt be a game.
Either way, the bills MUST BE PAID. For those 7 people, sounds like a great deal why wouldnt it !!! For the other 3 they pay way more than $15.
This is why we support P2P. $15 for EVERYTHING....or $50 for a COUPLE cash shop items....
Its a no brainer.
I don't know what fantasy world you live in where you get EVERYTHING for 15 bucks. Other than FFXIV what other new P2P MMOS are not going to nickle and dime you?
Wildstar is not even a pure sub model since it gives option for CREDDS. ESO is debatable because we don't have all the details.
So yeah surely looks like return of P2P model.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.' -Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid." -Luke McKinney
Originally posted by Sanguinelust I'd rather there be an option to sub. I've got so many games (MMO's) I like to play that I hate having to choose which one I'll sub to just so i can play it for a few hours a week. F2P is fine with me.
thats my preference too
I'm ok with most business models as long as the game is *fun*
Originally posted by GeezerGamerJust so I know I'm not making a clerical error, can you please break down those fees for me?I have 2. $29.99 for the box which includes a month, so it'e really a bit more than half of that. And then $12.99/mo starting in Sept. Did I miss more fees?
Okay, I'll break it down since you asked. Anything you pay them outside of your sub-fee for game stuff are the extra fees. I'll use a single player game analogy: The original box fee is what I paid for the game. Everything else are extras I paid for: mods, packs, dlc, expansions, unlocks, and anything else that costs me money. Those are the extras.
OK, what did I miss? With a free month, the box comes out to $17.00 and the montly fee is $12.99. This is one of the best deals in subscription MMO history.
So once I drop my 1st 17, there are no more fees after my Sub.
Right now, there are no Mod packs, there's no DLC, there are no unlocks. There are no expansions (yet). In fact, in your Rift, that you play there are all those. And if you didn't pay for the expansion, you have to pay extra. for the new souls. In fact, everything you just stated describes the F2P games, not FF14.
Some of SOE's bigger MMOs are not purely F2P, but are instead what I would call "tiered" payment models. That is, they offer both F2P and subscription options with varying degrees of access to game content. EQ, EQ2 and Vanguard offer the tiered models, with the subscription option generally offering full access to all content and features, and F2P option generally gives basic access, enough to give a somewhat satisfactory gaming experience. F2P, I suspect, is used as a hook to lure new players to try their games. These players quickly learn that moving over to a full subscription is encouraged by SOE (can I say "in-game advertising"?)
Full subscription is perhaps more prevalent than is accredited; I think with the bigger MMOs that are to come, the multi-optional payment model will become increasingly popular.
I didn't bother to read the article because the entire premise is BS. Aside from GW 2, virtually every AAA MMO has been released with a monthly sub in the US in recent years. The real trend is conversion to B2P/F2P within the first year or 2 after players race through the content at release and start cancelling in droves out of boredom not releasing without a sub. There's no reason to think TESO or Wildstar will buck the trend.
1. Zenimax was not silent because they wrestling internally, all games that pursue a P2P are always silent still somewhat close to release. If a game is silent on this topic then chances are that they are pursuing retail+sub. Kickstarters MMOs are the only exception to the rule, but they are generally always upfront.
2. Every single sub game post WoW has gone to F2P with the exception of non-themepark games like EVE, for all we know Wildstar and ESO will have the same fate as all their themepark predecessors. And one can argue that they intentionally are going P2P initially to milk all the players at launch as every MMO goes through massive peak at launch, plummet, then stabilize with plans to go F2P/B2P from the start. If I was a business man I would do the same thing.
3. With the exception of FF, which is an exception to the rule like how WoW is the exception to many things, no MMO has been on the console that requires a sub. FF's fan base in Japan alone will likely keep the game afloat. This could potentionally blow up in Zenimax's face, not to mention they have repeatedly said the game will be for TESO fans who likely don't play P2P games.
4. They have already said that they decided to not do a cash shop system because they don't want to figure out what sells and what doesn't as one of the reasons. This reeks of laziness. GW2 proves that a great game can be created, maintained, push out consistent content and not require a P2P model to be profitable.
Call me a freeloader if you want but I am sick and tired of spending $100+ on games that I only play for a few months to get the true feel of the game and it not being what was advertised.
TBH I tire of f2p games. You can drop several hundred dollars in a heartbeat and be nowhere if you're competitive. Unless of course you started when the game first hit open beta and stuck with it.(Even then a company can still throw something really menacing into their item mall and screw you down the road) I really hope these games flourish. I am tired of people just buying their way into a position of power and flaunting it. Granted that can still occur even in a p2p with RMTing. But, is less likely to occur and can result in those parties being banned. Also, lets stay away from multi payment systems. Look at how it train wrecked secret world.... B2p P2p Cash shop....Yeah, that went really well for them to start. Although, maybe if more people were employed the p2p market wouldn't always be struggling?
I believe that it is the new trend,TRY the sub model and if fails,have a backup plan to go cash shop.
I do not believe Square Enix has any plan on cash shop,but for the others,i most certainly believe they do.You might argue one is smarter than the other,but in case of Square,i believe they simply figure on not giving up,they will continue to work with the community to get the game where it warrants a sub fee.
In case of FFXIV,i know what areas of the game are a bit so so,but overall i can already see the total quality is far above any free to play game.I know quality is not a guarantee for success,it still comes down to weather players want to play your game.I believe Square will not give up,but for the others,i believe they have a plan and will go f2p rather than further invest in changes.
I don't know exact numbers of course but i am willing to bet Square Enix has already committed more in LOSSES than most games invest in their entire game.Even their older game FFXI was not turned out for instant profit like all other games,they relied on building a game that would have a following for a long time and turn profits down the road.
I can see the design of games and know they were going low risk,low end graphics.Cheaper to develop and run the game,that way if fails no problem to go cash shop and not as big a risk losing multi millions if it fails.Not many games going high end graphics,so it is still a low risk to turn out more of the same at least until the market demands it.IMO the graphics alone gives you a good starting indication on how committed the developer is,after that how much depth they put into each system tells you how much they invested in EFFORT.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by GeezerGamerJust so I know I'm not making a clerical error, can you please break down those fees for me?I have 2. $29.99 for the box which includes a month, so it'e really a bit more than half of that. And then $12.99/mo starting in Sept. Did I miss more fees?
Okay, I'll break it down since you asked. Anything you pay them outside of your sub-fee for game stuff are the extra fees. I'll use a single player game analogy: The original box fee is what I paid for the game. Everything else are extras I paid for: mods, packs, dlc, expansions, unlocks, and anything else that costs me money. Those are the extras.
OK, what did I miss? With a free month, the box comes out to $17.00 and the montly fee is $12.99. This is one of the best deals in subscription MMO history.
So once I drop my 1st 17, there are no more fees after my Sub.
Right now, there are no Mod packs, there's no DLC, there are no unlocks. There are no expansions (yet). In fact, in your Rift, that you play there are all those. And if you didn't pay for the expansion, you have to pay extra. for the new souls. In fact, everything you just stated describes the F2P games, not FF14.
I think he's implying that since there is a collector's edition, and pre order bonus items, that it is as bad as a cash shop. Which I hope he's not implying because that is really stretching it.
I think he's implying that since there is a collector's edition, and pre order bonus items, that it is as bad as a cash shop. Which I hope he's not implying because that is really stretching it.
its stretching it but i think it qualifies -- especially if CE comes w mounts
everyone draws the line at different spots
- some gamers have zero tolerance for any ingame perks gained by RL cash
It was predicted that the last form of resistance from the P2P games would be in the form of announcing P2P, selling the Box and then going F2P/B2P within the year or when they feel that they've milked the P2P crowd enough.
Then the announcement to F2P or B2P will renew interest, and those who enjoy those types will give it great amounts of attention in order for it to be even more popular than if they released that way.
This is all dependent that the game is at least fun and entertaining on a lot of levels. Though even still, if it isn't, it will just fall sooner. If it is, it will wait until the right moment and milk one crowd dry before moving to the next.
It happened a year sooner than I thought it would, to be honest. Though the first signs of such were with SWTOR with the rumors it was planning to go F2P from the get go, but just wanted the initial sales and P2P to recover the costs of making the game in the first place.
We then had this:
28:16
The above is just about business, just as a lot of the F2P have been. Though in this case, they target and milk those who believe P2P is still viable and healthy, when it's really just writing out it's will at the moment. Both milk people for all their worth, as a business should. This time, even more people are welcomed into the fold until we as a collective go "wait a minute".
Due to frequent travel in my youth, English isn't something I consider my primary language (and thus I obtained quirky ways of writing). German and French were always easier for me despite my family being U.S. citizens for over a century. Spanish I learned as a requirement in school, Japanese and Korean I acquired for my youthful desire of anime and gaming (and also work now). I only debate in English to help me work with it (and limit things). In addition, I'm not smart enough to remain fluent in everything and typically need exposure to get in the groove of things again if I haven't heard it in a while. If you understand Mandarin, I know a little, but it has actually been a challenge and could use some help.
Also, I thoroughly enjoy debates and have accounts on over a dozen sites for this. If you wish to engage in such, please put effort in a post and provide sources -- I will then do the same with what I already wrote (if I didn't) as well as with my responses to your own. Expanding my information on a subject makes my stance either change or strengthen the next time I speak of it or write a thesis. Allow me to thank you sincerely for your time.
Great article Mike B. (as always) - you and Bill are my favorite columnists here as you both seem to share similar ideas/beliefs as I do. And this article is no different. I agree with pretty much everything you said. I'm sure others here might have stated the same (I apologize, as I don't have the time to read all the comments).
Now for my rant on the subject!
First kudos to those dev companies for choosing to go with the sub model. Personally, I much prefer a sub model over the f2p model. GW2 aside (which pretty much seems to be an anomaly!), sub model games are just head-and-shoulders better for the companies themselves in financial terms, but are much better for the player IMHO - often times in financial terms as well as game quality and content.
To me, F2P is mostly a gimmick, aimed as hooking the simple-minded and sucking them dry of their money without appearing to openly charge them a fee like a sub-game. From my standpoint, sub games are the honest, hard-working contractor/salesperson, etc., trying to sell you an honest product while giving you all the up-front costs ahead of time. F2P on the other hand is that shady contractor/salesperson, trying to pull the wool over your eyes from the get go...and fully realizing that he's going to nickel and dime you for months to come!
And there's been some real winners out their (I really mean losers or perhaps shysters). Take Neverwinter for example! I love the Forgotten Realms and actually really enjoyed the gameplay and the Foundry in that game. I purchased the Guardian pack and then soon realized that wouldn't be nearly enough for Cryptic/PWE and not only would I need to cough up more money to fully enjoy their game, but would need to cough up considerably more to account for their exorbitant asking prices in their cash shop. What was I thinking? I should've known going in, considering it was PWE!
And that's the problem as some games will not only make you buy the box up front, but will absolutely kill you with a fee here and there until you've spent far more than the $14.99 monthly sub-fee to fully enjoy that game each month.
Unfortunately GW2 (which I'm not a big fan of due to gameplay reasons) and Marvel Heroes are the only MMOs to date to seem to have done the F2P model justice IMHO. Both those two games never get up in your face, making it blatantly obvious that you need to buy this or that, while everything in their respective cash shops is truly for convenience/cosmetic purposes. In addition, both games allow you the ability to spend a box-price type of cost up front in order to get hours of play afterwards without the need to buy anything more. For GW2, I purchased the Digital Deluxe edition and for Marvel Heroes, the Ultimate Pack. IMHO, both were money well-spent with ironically enough the MH Ultimate pack being the best $200 I've spent in a looong time!.
However, granted "To each their own"! Others will find the prices for the two products mentioned to be absurd (particularly in the case of Marvel Heroes), but I believe you get what you pay for and $200 seems to me like a reasonable price to pay for ALL the heroes up from with a majority of their respective costumes and hours of enjoyment with said heroes!
But, therein lies the rub! Most gamers (and perhaps people) are cheap and unfortunately society teaches us that we all deserve something for nothing, when in reality, it SHOULD BE precisely the opposite! And that is what P2P games unfortunately MUST compete with: society's catering to those that have done nothing to earn their keep while saying, "here take this, pay nothing for it - even though you've done nothing to earn any of it!" That is an uphill battle that I'm not sure these developers can win.
I myself believe that $14.99 a month is a small price to pay for hours per month of entertainment, especially when you consider you can do something for 2 hours, like go to the movies and pay at least that much - for 2 hours of possible enjoyment. At least with your MMO, the chances are fairly certain that you will have a good time. You can easily pay that price in other avenues and be left completely disappointed. Pretty much after the first month or so of playing an MMO, you have a darn good idea as to whether that MMO is your cup of tea or not!
So, in closing, while I believe the decision to go to P2P is an admirable one and one that I personally prefer; sadly, I'm not so sure it is the correct one when you consider how society has evolved and the manner of the greater public's thinking!
Best of luck to them! I know I'll be giving each one of those games a try!
EDIT: I almost forgot RIFT! That is another game in which also has a decent F2P model.
SWtor 60 for game, 4 months of subs (120) played 20 hrs a week
TSW 250 for lifetime player (250) played 20 hrs a week
RIFT 30 for Storm Legion expansion (30) play 20 hrs a week since f2p conversion
AOC 40 for sub for 3 month (40) play 20 hrs a week since f2p, but have to buy sub to get full game play
so here we have 4 games that alot of us have played
SWtor is garbage f2p, you have to buy stuff to play = trash
TSW has cosmetics and DLC, have to buy stuff to play but only content packs = ok
RIFT has to pay for expansion classes and future expansion, DLC is free, store is convenience and cosmetics, dont have to pay to advance anywhere = great
AOC have to sub to get full game = bad
IF future games follow RIFT, I am all for f2p forever, I will buy stuff as a way to support the company, just like I did with Path of Exile.
These pay2play business models you guys think are so great, are all following the SWtor model, of charging a ton for a meaningless game at launch, getting some subs, and converting to f2p later, cause there just isnt enough revenue from subs
I was subscribed to swtor b4 it went f2p the day it went f2p I quit reason I quit is cause well I realized to be a f2p player you would end up spending 3 times as much just to get the benefits of 1 person with a sub on the same game , I have played over 100 f2p mmo's over the last 5 years all to notice 1 huge problem with them lack of content , all only have pvp to actually look forward to , also be prepared to spend 20$ - 50$ a month just to stay on par with the rest of the competition ..
that being said I prefer the p2p model over all the mmo game models on the market
This doesn't make any sense (besides the grammar). You prefer p2p games. SWTOR added f2p option, but you could still pay a subscription to gain access to all content. So even though SWTOR still had a p2p option you quit because.....you would be spending more as a f2p player? Why not just remain a subscriber? Your argument makes no sense.
Originally posted by Nadia Originally posted by FoomerangI think he's implying that since there is a collector's edition, and pre order bonus items, that it is as bad as a cash shop. Which I hope he's not implying because that is really stretching it.
its stretching it but i think it qualifies -- especially if CE comes w mounts
everyone draws the line at different spots
- some gamers have zero tolerance for any ingame perks gained by RL cash
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics and mounts
- some gamers tolerate experience potions
and the list goes on
I guess so. I dont see offering incentive items for an initial purchase in the same category as items for sale in a cash shop in a game you already own.
Originally posted by DistopiaI just hope (especially in the case of ESO) that these companies have some type of actual sustainable plan here. I certainly hope they're not simply going by the opinions shared on sites like this. As these sites typical side with anything viewed as "oldschool" over all else. There's little actual thought put into why this or that is preferred in these posts, they simply think it just means a better game or community and it doesn't.
Sub may not mean "better" community. But it does mean "different" community. You have to admit F2P mmos and P2P mmos have a different feel from each other. The tone of the game changes. When Rift when F2P, it just didnt feel the same anymore and that was a subtle cash shop.For an mmorpg to work for me, I want to know that everyone I'm playing with is paying the same price. Maybe its just me, but I like the feeling of "we're in it together" that a monthly sub creates.Cash shop games don't have that. You get whales that show off the crap they bought and the freeloaders that lol at the "suckers" and thank them for the free game. Its not the same vibe.Thats the best way I can describe it for me personally.
To me that just seems like personality traits. Instead of the whale bragging about everything they bought, and the Freebie putting him down for doing it. IN a P2P you have the min-maxer bragging about all that he's earned and showing it off, while the casual guy puts him down for having no life.
Choosing how you spend your time in a game and choosing how you spend your money in a game are not good comparisons imo. Id also argue that the player driven economy is one of the VERY few unique aspects of an mmorpg. No other genre has it. Cash shops undermine a defining feature of the genre.
This is the single biggest reason for my departure from GW2. And it is why I am done with Cash Shops and hope to be subbed to FF14 for years to come. I am a meta gamer and I love to craft and play the markets. GW2 just lacks this. as does all the other F2P games.
But I gather these are important to you as well. Some of my fondest memories in older MMOs revolve around the activities that have currently become despised. Camping, grinding, farming, repeating content til you wanted to scream but finally! I got what I wanted. The people that are attracted to this kind of game see the value in a subscription, these activities take time.
However, what we determined as a defining feature in the genre mean little to the F2P/B2P crowd. Action, fun, Non-Stop until you burn out and move to the next title. These are what fules them. To them, when it's no longer exciting, it's time to move on. What then is the point of the sub?
Problem is, Those games aren't really MMORPGs. but MMORPG developers wanted their money. Now we get games that don't truly appeal to anyone. save a very small handful of titles.
What devs need to realize is that there are enough gamers willing to pay a sub. SWTOR's 2M sales is proof of that. But we need a reason to log in every day. If that reason isnt there, Why on earth would I want to pay a sub for a game that will run out of things to do in a month? SWTOR is also proof of this too.
SWTOR didn't fail (As a sub game) because it was a subscription game, it failed because it didn't have enough things to do in it long term.
Rift had mediocre success as a Sub game. It had the dungeons and raids down. For that, I'd say Rift was the best in the industry. Better than WoW even. So why did it meet with moderate success and eventually drop the sub? I believe it didn't have enough of the other things to do. To this day, i have yet to experience a game that had as much to do on a day to day basis as TBC did. Do you think that might have something to do with why it was the pinnacle of WoW's success in most WoW player's memories? At least the ones I talked to.
Rift is such an interesting case. Feature wise - it's fairly robust. There's raids, there's crafting, there's housing, there's a great skill system, yet something is missing. It lacks something that entrances players. For myself, it was the lack of character and the combat system - just felt bland and uninspired. SWTOR is the inverse to that - it had character, it felt like a star wars games but lacked the feature list. I think your analysis is spot on. I'm resting my hopes on Wildstar - it has both characters and an exhaustive feature list. I'm hoping it catches on, seems like a fun, polished game.
Guild Wars 2 is such a perplexing period for me. Its launch, and beta, were amazing. The combat was refreshing and truly changed the way I think of MMO combat. I was excited by the dungeon list and the features of the open world. Then they changed course and brought on the Living Story. Achievement chasing, whacking signs, and disconnecting stories became standard over the core of the game they're supposedly trying to strengthen. It COULD be a great game, but it's hollowing itself out because of ArenaNet's defiance towards adding what the customers want: ENDGAME.
Originally posted by FoomerangI think he's implying that since there is a collector's edition, and pre order bonus items, that it is as bad as a cash shop. Which I hope he's not implying because that is really stretching it.
its stretching it but i think it qualifies -- especially if CE comes w mounts
everyone draws the line at different spots
- some gamers have zero tolerance for any ingame perks gained by RL cash
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics and mounts
- some gamers tolerate experience potions
and the list goes on
I guess so. I dont see offering incentive items for an initial purchase in the same category as items for sale in a cash shop in a game you already own.
Has there ever been an MMO with a boxed fee that didn't give you a little something for spending an extra few?
And technically, it's not a mount. It's a mount skin, You have to have a level 20 mount 1st to make use of it.
And my line. It's not about items, especially cosmetics. I'm fine with that. If FF14 put in a cosmetic ONLY cash shop, I'd still sub. I'll quit the day I can convert real money into Gil. (sanctioned)
I think it is absolutely fantastic to see the monthly subscription model making a come back.
I hate being nickel and dimed for things, I also hate immersion breaking by the game asking me to purchase this upgrade or that new feature, or a chest that I cant open unless i spend rl money on a key.
I hate the spreading mentality of gamers that games should be free. No they should not. Developers have to eat, games cost money to make and hardware costs money to maintain. Someone has to pay the bill, even in F2P models, and I am not ok with the idea of playing a game "freely" on someone elses buck, it seems like abusive welfare. I would rather pay my share and have you pay yours too, lets all be equals.
My experience has also taught me that the best highest quality MMOs with the longest staying power are 100% subscription based. While MMOs that are F2P like GW2 are fun for a very short time before being shelved likely forever. I am not looking for a console game, I am not poor, I am an adult gamer looking to really sink my time and interest into a long term MMO, and I am more then willing to pay for quality entertainment, and I think everyone else should be as well.
I would be happier if F2P went the way everyone thought that monthly subscription models were going, its breading bad ideas into consumers heads and its not good for the industry.
I look at F2P the same way I look at my weekly magic the gathering group. A group of 8 of us are there to play magic, we order pizza. 2 people announce that they do not have the money, so the remaining 6 of us split the cost. When the pizza arrives, everyone decides to let the 2 who didnt pay for the pizza have some anyway. So they basically get "Free 2 Play" pizza. Well it wasnt free, I payed for it, and I think it would have been a lot more honorable if they had paid for their share as well rather then straddling the cost on someone else.
F2P is a cancer on the MMO genre, and the minds of gamers.
If EQ Next was smart they would go with a subscription model, too. The population of the player base is hugely impacted by this decision, and there is a tremendous difference in the quality of players you will have in the game.
It's comparable to amateur sports leagues: if you want to play pickup games at the park for free, you can, but few are serious players. The serious players who really enjoy the sport will join a league. It may cost money, but it is more competitive, fun and you are playing with like-minded individuals.
I hate being nickel and dimed for things, I also hate immersion breaking by the game asking me to purchase this upgrade or that new feature, or a chest that I cant open unless i spend rl money on a key.
This times 10000000000000000....
Even with a subscription, do you know how annoying it is to see the big orange pulsating flashing $ symbol at the top of your UI in SWTOR, or the glowing blue pulsating icon at the lower left of your UI in Rift? Or the big pop up adds each time u enter the game in AoC...
People crap on WoW all the time because its battle.net shop offers literally 3 mounts that can only be gotten through the shop, even though they are no faster than the other 100+ in game free mounts. While i can understand the view that if you pay a sub, every mount should be available in game, don't forget that there are countless in game mounts being added to WoW on a constant basis; where as if you take a F2P game like Rift or SW, just about every cosmetic item or mount developed for it since their conversions are cash shop only, even if you subscribe...that is full of shit right there. With the way the item shops are developed, even if they had stayed P2P only, their revenu would have jumped regardless, considering the amount of items subscribers have to pay extra for no matter what.
Thats the type of thing im extreemly happy avoiding with my lowly 15$/month
Comments
I was subscribed to swtor b4 it went f2p the day it went f2p I quit reason I quit is cause well I realized to be a f2p player you would end up spending 3 times as much just to get the benefits of 1 person with a sub on the same game , I have played over 100 f2p mmo's over the last 5 years all to notice 1 huge problem with them lack of content , all only have pvp to actually look forward to , also be prepared to spend 20$ - 50$ a month just to stay on par with the rest of the competition ..
that being said I prefer the p2p model over all the mmo game models on the market
"Just about every new release is F2P in some form and even games released subscription-based have been making the switch at a breakneck pace."
They didn't see the light, or become wise to the F2P system.. Some were just simply a failed game..
Sw:ToR - Practically nothing to do at max lvl, crafting system is next to useless, I quit after getting max lvl in 5 days, wasted £45 on this. Bioware should have stayed solo, not included EA, they have no idea how to run an MMO, and they eat companies.. Maxis, now Bioware, and probly others too.
The Secret World - Went F2P the second it came out of beta.. Why?.. Not enough interest, now you buy the game, and it's F2P.
I don't know what fantasy world you live in where you get EVERYTHING for 15 bucks. Other than FFXIV what other new P2P MMOS are not going to nickle and dime you?
Wildstar is not even a pure sub model since it gives option for CREDDS. ESO is debatable because we don't have all the details.
So yeah surely looks like return of P2P model.
"The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
-Jesse Schell
"Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
-Luke McKinney
i havent seen gamers clash this much over business models
since SOE implemented RMAH 7 years ago in EQ2 w Station Exchange
EQ2 fan sites
thats my preference too
I'm ok with most business models as long as the game is *fun*
EQ2 fan sites
OK, what did I miss?
With a free month, the box comes out to $17.00 and the montly fee is $12.99.
This is one of the best deals in subscription MMO history.
So once I drop my 1st 17, there are no more fees after my Sub.
Right now, there are no Mod packs, there's no DLC, there are no unlocks. There are no expansions (yet). In fact, in your Rift, that you play there are all those. And if you didn't pay for the expansion, you have to pay extra. for the new souls. In fact, everything you just stated describes the F2P games, not FF14.
Some of SOE's bigger MMOs are not purely F2P, but are instead what I would call "tiered" payment models. That is, they offer both F2P and subscription options with varying degrees of access to game content. EQ, EQ2 and Vanguard offer the tiered models, with the subscription option generally offering full access to all content and features, and F2P option generally gives basic access, enough to give a somewhat satisfactory gaming experience. F2P, I suspect, is used as a hook to lure new players to try their games. These players quickly learn that moving over to a full subscription is encouraged by SOE (can I say "in-game advertising"?)
Full subscription is perhaps more prevalent than is accredited; I think with the bigger MMOs that are to come, the multi-optional payment model will become increasingly popular.
DAOC Live (inactive): R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R6 Healer
My cents are
1. Zenimax was not silent because they wrestling internally, all games that pursue a P2P are always silent still somewhat close to release. If a game is silent on this topic then chances are that they are pursuing retail+sub. Kickstarters MMOs are the only exception to the rule, but they are generally always upfront.
2. Every single sub game post WoW has gone to F2P with the exception of non-themepark games like EVE, for all we know Wildstar and ESO will have the same fate as all their themepark predecessors. And one can argue that they intentionally are going P2P initially to milk all the players at launch as every MMO goes through massive peak at launch, plummet, then stabilize with plans to go F2P/B2P from the start. If I was a business man I would do the same thing.
3. With the exception of FF, which is an exception to the rule like how WoW is the exception to many things, no MMO has been on the console that requires a sub. FF's fan base in Japan alone will likely keep the game afloat. This could potentionally blow up in Zenimax's face, not to mention they have repeatedly said the game will be for TESO fans who likely don't play P2P games.
4. They have already said that they decided to not do a cash shop system because they don't want to figure out what sells and what doesn't as one of the reasons. This reeks of laziness. GW2 proves that a great game can be created, maintained, push out consistent content and not require a P2P model to be profitable.
Call me a freeloader if you want but I am sick and tired of spending $100+ on games that I only play for a few months to get the true feel of the game and it not being what was advertised.
I believe that it is the new trend,TRY the sub model and if fails,have a backup plan to go cash shop.
I do not believe Square Enix has any plan on cash shop,but for the others,i most certainly believe they do.You might argue one is smarter than the other,but in case of Square,i believe they simply figure on not giving up,they will continue to work with the community to get the game where it warrants a sub fee.
In case of FFXIV,i know what areas of the game are a bit so so,but overall i can already see the total quality is far above any free to play game.I know quality is not a guarantee for success,it still comes down to weather players want to play your game.I believe Square will not give up,but for the others,i believe they have a plan and will go f2p rather than further invest in changes.
I don't know exact numbers of course but i am willing to bet Square Enix has already committed more in LOSSES than most games invest in their entire game.Even their older game FFXI was not turned out for instant profit like all other games,they relied on building a game that would have a following for a long time and turn profits down the road.
I can see the design of games and know they were going low risk,low end graphics.Cheaper to develop and run the game,that way if fails no problem to go cash shop and not as big a risk losing multi millions if it fails.Not many games going high end graphics,so it is still a low risk to turn out more of the same at least until the market demands it.IMO the graphics alone gives you a good starting indication on how committed the developer is,after that how much depth they put into each system tells you how much they invested in EFFORT.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
its stretching it but i think it qualifies -- especially if CE comes w mounts
everyone draws the line at different spots
- some gamers have zero tolerance for any ingame perks gained by RL cash
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics and mounts
- some gamers tolerate experience potions
and the list goes on
EQ2 fan sites
It was predicted that the last form of resistance from the P2P games would be in the form of announcing P2P, selling the Box and then going F2P/B2P within the year or when they feel that they've milked the P2P crowd enough.
Then the announcement to F2P or B2P will renew interest, and those who enjoy those types will give it great amounts of attention in order for it to be even more popular than if they released that way.
This is all dependent that the game is at least fun and entertaining on a lot of levels. Though even still, if it isn't, it will just fall sooner. If it is, it will wait until the right moment and milk one crowd dry before moving to the next.
It happened a year sooner than I thought it would, to be honest. Though the first signs of such were with SWTOR with the rumors it was planning to go F2P from the get go, but just wanted the initial sales and P2P to recover the costs of making the game in the first place.
We then had this:
28:16
The above is just about business, just as a lot of the F2P have been. Though in this case, they target and milk those who believe P2P is still viable and healthy, when it's really just writing out it's will at the moment. Both milk people for all their worth, as a business should. This time, even more people are welcomed into the fold until we as a collective go "wait a minute".
Great article Mike B. (as always) - you and Bill are my favorite columnists here as you both seem to share similar ideas/beliefs as I do. And this article is no different. I agree with pretty much everything you said. I'm sure others here might have stated the same (I apologize, as I don't have the time to read all the comments).
Now for my rant on the subject!
First kudos to those dev companies for choosing to go with the sub model. Personally, I much prefer a sub model over the f2p model. GW2 aside (which pretty much seems to be an anomaly!), sub model games are just head-and-shoulders better for the companies themselves in financial terms, but are much better for the player IMHO - often times in financial terms as well as game quality and content.
To me, F2P is mostly a gimmick, aimed as hooking the simple-minded and sucking them dry of their money without appearing to openly charge them a fee like a sub-game. From my standpoint, sub games are the honest, hard-working contractor/salesperson, etc., trying to sell you an honest product while giving you all the up-front costs ahead of time. F2P on the other hand is that shady contractor/salesperson, trying to pull the wool over your eyes from the get go...and fully realizing that he's going to nickel and dime you for months to come!
And there's been some real winners out their (I really mean losers or perhaps shysters). Take Neverwinter for example! I love the Forgotten Realms and actually really enjoyed the gameplay and the Foundry in that game. I purchased the Guardian pack and then soon realized that wouldn't be nearly enough for Cryptic/PWE and not only would I need to cough up more money to fully enjoy their game, but would need to cough up considerably more to account for their exorbitant asking prices in their cash shop. What was I thinking? I should've known going in, considering it was PWE!
And that's the problem as some games will not only make you buy the box up front, but will absolutely kill you with a fee here and there until you've spent far more than the $14.99 monthly sub-fee to fully enjoy that game each month.
Unfortunately GW2 (which I'm not a big fan of due to gameplay reasons) and Marvel Heroes are the only MMOs to date to seem to have done the F2P model justice IMHO. Both those two games never get up in your face, making it blatantly obvious that you need to buy this or that, while everything in their respective cash shops is truly for convenience/cosmetic purposes. In addition, both games allow you the ability to spend a box-price type of cost up front in order to get hours of play afterwards without the need to buy anything more. For GW2, I purchased the Digital Deluxe edition and for Marvel Heroes, the Ultimate Pack. IMHO, both were money well-spent with ironically enough the MH Ultimate pack being the best $200 I've spent in a looong time!.
However, granted "To each their own"! Others will find the prices for the two products mentioned to be absurd (particularly in the case of Marvel Heroes), but I believe you get what you pay for and $200 seems to me like a reasonable price to pay for ALL the heroes up from with a majority of their respective costumes and hours of enjoyment with said heroes!
But, therein lies the rub! Most gamers (and perhaps people) are cheap and unfortunately society teaches us that we all deserve something for nothing, when in reality, it SHOULD BE precisely the opposite! And that is what P2P games unfortunately MUST compete with: society's catering to those that have done nothing to earn their keep while saying, "here take this, pay nothing for it - even though you've done nothing to earn any of it!" That is an uphill battle that I'm not sure these developers can win.
I myself believe that $14.99 a month is a small price to pay for hours per month of entertainment, especially when you consider you can do something for 2 hours, like go to the movies and pay at least that much - for 2 hours of possible enjoyment. At least with your MMO, the chances are fairly certain that you will have a good time. You can easily pay that price in other avenues and be left completely disappointed. Pretty much after the first month or so of playing an MMO, you have a darn good idea as to whether that MMO is your cup of tea or not!
So, in closing, while I believe the decision to go to P2P is an admirable one and one that I personally prefer; sadly, I'm not so sure it is the correct one when you consider how society has evolved and the manner of the greater public's thinking!
Best of luck to them! I know I'll be giving each one of those games a try!
EDIT: I almost forgot RIFT! That is another game in which also has a decent F2P model.
last 3 yrs
Cash spent on various games
SWtor 60 for game, 4 months of subs (120) played 20 hrs a week
TSW 250 for lifetime player (250) played 20 hrs a week
RIFT 30 for Storm Legion expansion (30) play 20 hrs a week since f2p conversion
AOC 40 for sub for 3 month (40) play 20 hrs a week since f2p, but have to buy sub to get full game play
so here we have 4 games that alot of us have played
SWtor is garbage f2p, you have to buy stuff to play = trash
TSW has cosmetics and DLC, have to buy stuff to play but only content packs = ok
RIFT has to pay for expansion classes and future expansion, DLC is free, store is convenience and cosmetics, dont have to pay to advance anywhere = great
AOC have to sub to get full game = bad
IF future games follow RIFT, I am all for f2p forever, I will buy stuff as a way to support the company, just like I did with Path of Exile.
These pay2play business models you guys think are so great, are all following the SWtor model, of charging a ton for a meaningless game at launch, getting some subs, and converting to f2p later, cause there just isnt enough revenue from subs
This doesn't make any sense (besides the grammar). You prefer p2p games. SWTOR added f2p option, but you could still pay a subscription to gain access to all content. So even though SWTOR still had a p2p option you quit because.....you would be spending more as a f2p player? Why not just remain a subscriber? Your argument makes no sense.
everyone draws the line at different spots
- some gamers have zero tolerance for any ingame perks gained by RL cash
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics
- some gamers tolerate cosmetics and mounts
- some gamers tolerate experience potions
and the list goes on
I guess so. I dont see offering incentive items for an initial purchase in the same category as items for sale in a cash shop in a game you already own.
Rift is such an interesting case. Feature wise - it's fairly robust. There's raids, there's crafting, there's housing, there's a great skill system, yet something is missing. It lacks something that entrances players. For myself, it was the lack of character and the combat system - just felt bland and uninspired. SWTOR is the inverse to that - it had character, it felt like a star wars games but lacked the feature list. I think your analysis is spot on. I'm resting my hopes on Wildstar - it has both characters and an exhaustive feature list. I'm hoping it catches on, seems like a fun, polished game.
Guild Wars 2 is such a perplexing period for me. Its launch, and beta, were amazing. The combat was refreshing and truly changed the way I think of MMO combat. I was excited by the dungeon list and the features of the open world. Then they changed course and brought on the Living Story. Achievement chasing, whacking signs, and disconnecting stories became standard over the core of the game they're supposedly trying to strengthen. It COULD be a great game, but it's hollowing itself out because of ArenaNet's defiance towards adding what the customers want: ENDGAME.
Has there ever been an MMO with a boxed fee that didn't give you a little something for spending an extra few?
And technically, it's not a mount. It's a mount skin, You have to have a level 20 mount 1st to make use of it.
And my line. It's not about items, especially cosmetics. I'm fine with that. If FF14 put in a cosmetic ONLY cash shop, I'd still sub. I'll quit the day I can convert real money into Gil. (sanctioned)
I think it is absolutely fantastic to see the monthly subscription model making a come back.
I hate being nickel and dimed for things, I also hate immersion breaking by the game asking me to purchase this upgrade or that new feature, or a chest that I cant open unless i spend rl money on a key.
I hate the spreading mentality of gamers that games should be free. No they should not. Developers have to eat, games cost money to make and hardware costs money to maintain. Someone has to pay the bill, even in F2P models, and I am not ok with the idea of playing a game "freely" on someone elses buck, it seems like abusive welfare. I would rather pay my share and have you pay yours too, lets all be equals.
My experience has also taught me that the best highest quality MMOs with the longest staying power are 100% subscription based. While MMOs that are F2P like GW2 are fun for a very short time before being shelved likely forever. I am not looking for a console game, I am not poor, I am an adult gamer looking to really sink my time and interest into a long term MMO, and I am more then willing to pay for quality entertainment, and I think everyone else should be as well.
I would be happier if F2P went the way everyone thought that monthly subscription models were going, its breading bad ideas into consumers heads and its not good for the industry.
I look at F2P the same way I look at my weekly magic the gathering group. A group of 8 of us are there to play magic, we order pizza. 2 people announce that they do not have the money, so the remaining 6 of us split the cost. When the pizza arrives, everyone decides to let the 2 who didnt pay for the pizza have some anyway. So they basically get "Free 2 Play" pizza. Well it wasnt free, I payed for it, and I think it would have been a lot more honorable if they had paid for their share as well rather then straddling the cost on someone else.
F2P is a cancer on the MMO genre, and the minds of gamers.
If EQ Next was smart they would go with a subscription model, too. The population of the player base is hugely impacted by this decision, and there is a tremendous difference in the quality of players you will have in the game.
It's comparable to amateur sports leagues: if you want to play pickup games at the park for free, you can, but few are serious players. The serious players who really enjoy the sport will join a league. It may cost money, but it is more competitive, fun and you are playing with like-minded individuals.
This times 10000000000000000....
Even with a subscription, do you know how annoying it is to see the big orange pulsating flashing $ symbol at the top of your UI in SWTOR, or the glowing blue pulsating icon at the lower left of your UI in Rift? Or the big pop up adds each time u enter the game in AoC...
People crap on WoW all the time because its battle.net shop offers literally 3 mounts that can only be gotten through the shop, even though they are no faster than the other 100+ in game free mounts. While i can understand the view that if you pay a sub, every mount should be available in game, don't forget that there are countless in game mounts being added to WoW on a constant basis; where as if you take a F2P game like Rift or SW, just about every cosmetic item or mount developed for it since their conversions are cash shop only, even if you subscribe...that is full of shit right there. With the way the item shops are developed, even if they had stayed P2P only, their revenu would have jumped regardless, considering the amount of items subscribers have to pay extra for no matter what.
Thats the type of thing im extreemly happy avoiding with my lowly 15$/month