Originally posted by BillMurphy It's sort of more a "free trial" this way, I think. I'll be curious to see how fun it is to play an Ork, but I can't imagine they'll be too underpowered, or none of these F2P players will spend money to unlock all the races.
I think they should just do it like other games have in the past. The author mentioned LoL. I would also take a look at Mechwarrior online. If I recall correctly, you always get 4 or 5 new mechs to play for free (random picked mechs from all categories) every 2 weeks. If F2P had a chance to at least try out the other races, they will sell more.
If there are 4 classes per faction for example. Maybe only 1 out of the 4 will be available for F2P players to play. They wouldn't level up, or be able to change the gear. Just get a feeling of another factions playstyle. If they do add this, I don't think the current system would be too bad.
I think this is a good business model - those the pay get the full game, free players get to play and add to the lore of the game... I cannot wait to try all the races, inc. the Free to WAAH! I Orks
Alot of the free to play with item mall games have addictive item malls, like really addictive, and they jack up the ability level so that if someone does decide to buy item mall points, they will drastically increase in ability (level)
Why shouldn't subscribers have an improved experience over F2P players?
I find it odd that there is a large pool of opinion that seems to lean towards giving the same experience to those who make no financial contribution whatsoever towards a game and those that do. IMO this is entirely wrong, those people who pay for a product should have a discernibly improved experience over those that do not.
To me this is the correct way to make a F2P game. It actually gives a benefit to subscribing. To me the morally dubious way of making a F2P game is to fill the cash shop with lots of gambling boxes.
I agree that P2P should have advantages over F2P .. Anyway from reading above if you sub you get stronger experience with orkz
and from what I remember Orkz were numerous in fights, a plague if you like, so you'd expect more F2P players all ganging up to attack P2P marines for example and winning just by numerical advantage.
sure aload might get slaughtered but they'd win, that's what the games aiming for I think. You can F2P and it makes it more like the game I remember, as long as players work together anyway.
Originally posted by Arthasm It's trial only, I don't see anything "free" here. Next year will be alot troubles for "F2P" in EU when new laws come.
What new laws? I'm from Europe myself so could you explain or send me a link, I'm really curious (no not a trolling post or what ever, i just haven't heard of it).
About the pay model in this game. I guess its a bit early still to give judgement. But when i look at Planetside 2, Heroes and Generals and APB (when i still played it), those games are F2P, sure you can pay real money and buy that weapon you want much more early. But those weapons are available for none paying customers as well. It just takes you longer, though in APB when i played it, it didn't take that long but you had to rebuy it every week or so..and even that was no problem as you got plenty of ingame currency. With Planetside 2 i even bought things cause they didn't force me what so ever, i just wanted to have it. Where with games that are F2P and say "give money or we will limit you!" i just quit playing.
I prefer a pay to play module though. I find MMORPG's with a sub better then F2P. This is my personal oppinion, you can disagree but i prefer to pay up a steady amount each month knowing i won't be hold back by investing more money then having to buy lose parts of the game that are always more expensive then having a sub. I don't want to pay 8 euro's for a inventory bag that only adds 10 more space.
It is a bad idea, each faction should have had a f2p option, for orks-gretchin, for imperial-imperial guard, for Eldar-guardians and leave the paying players get Orks-boyz/nobz, imperial- Space Marines, and Eldar- Aspect warriors.
I wish all games would do something like this. It gives the people who don't want to pay to play a chance to try out the game. I would like to see stuff like this more and less of the crap F2P stuff that happens now.
The only thing I can say is that this would be a nice way of getting rid of a box price on a game and launch it as a subscription/F2P model. The subscription should get things that the F2P's don't have access to. Races, Mounts, Housing, etc are all good ways to reward someone who supports a game thru subscription well enticing a F2P person to subscribe.
the F2P model is why the game list on this site has hundreds of blah entries instead of a couple dozen really strong ones (which would be better).
I am a WH nerd (though i prefer warmachine/hordes) and it saddens me to see a WH game be cheapened in such a way as this, but if it's a colossal failure due to crappy F2P, maybe it will be the game that makes people in control of the purse strings at game studios think about reverting to the old, tried and true method of just having everyone pay the same damn amount per month (with, naturally, discounts for multimonth subs).
remember when the only games in town were the EQs, FF11, AO, Lineage2, AC SWG EvE (in its infancy) and UO? and they were ALL pretty good??
Me too.
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Originally posted by Dreamo84 I actually kinda like that idea. Play as a peasant for free =D. Not everyone can be the "hero" soldier.
No thanks, I think I'll pass... along with the $50~$60 and $15 a month I'm happy to pay for a game (F2P Or Sub) that's actually good. And I doubt I'm the only one that's going to say that.
Pay To Win never has worked and never will work and I'm delighted to see any game that tries die in a horrible fire.
It seems the Warhammer Intellectual Property goes to anyone who's willing to throw money at Games Workshop... regardless how inept they are at managing it.
The wrong way to do F2P is to do it in an MMORPG. Period. RPGs/MMORPGs are all about earning stuff. Earning. Not buying with cash (unless you're a complete loser). Xp, loot, items, everything - should be earned by playing, not paying. F2P for MMORPGs wouldn't work at all unless it involved pay 2 win and selling game data. So just stop it. It's sewage.
F2P MMORPGs are lower quality games for lower quality players or losers that want to pay for game data instead of earn it, and it's a business model for profit that benefits corporations, not gamers, not players.
F2P works excellently in other genres - for ex, it works great for MOBA, where it doesn't involve pay 2 win at all, and the gameplay doesn't revolve around a corruptible collecting of stuff. It's not affecting your ability to win at the game if you're paying $10 for a skin for your favorite champion, or even if you're buying a champion for cash that someone else gains thru playing, since no single champion is guaranteed win - it's just variety.
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
In addition, F2P is bad for MMORPG health and community. People who don't have to pay don't usually care, don't stick around, are just take up space and resources. The best MMORPGs are worth playing consistently and have people around who play consistently. I suppose in many of the crappy MMORPGs of today it doesn't matter as much since they're more like single player online games for dummies with ADD.
F2P helps games like MOBA since they're mostly PvP and having more bodies involved makes for fast matches and more variety of people to encounter.
MMORPGs IMO don't benefit from having more bodies involved, they benefit more from having more dedicated and quality people around, and F2P isn't the way to attract that quality, it's a way to get masses of people who don't give a crap.
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
Hopefully they can come up with a better way to make money from their game then this, going ahead with this setup is only likely to hurt them in the long-run.
Think about it like this, if you tried the game out for free and found you were so gimped and just getting ganked over and over, would you think the game is fun and worth sticking around to make that first critical paid transaction? I certainly would not.
The poster child for terrible FTP is Star Wars the old republic. Charging people for an extra action bar is laughable. I was a subscriber to the game, left for over a year, figured I'd come back to try the game FTP and BAM, couldn't get a 2nd action bar because it was locked behind a pay window. I immediately uninstalled the game and didn't look back. Not that I don't have $20 a month, but the entire business practice turned me off and I refuse to support it.
The best FTP game I've played has been Marvel Heroes (more of an action RPG) and the best BTP (But to play) so far has been Guild Wars 2. Dying to try The Secret World though, have heard great things.
I'm sick of this whole free to play scam bullshit anyway. I have no problem paying for a decent game. I'd rather know the price up front and play on a level playing field then be hammered with endless mirco transaction nonsense anyway. Then you have the annoying trust fund princesses who get moms credit card maxxed out and pretend they accomplished something. Free to play can die in a fire. It might work for MOBA's, but it sucks for just about anything else.
So, we get all of the negatives of F2P with chat spam and children trolling without the benefits of having a healthier community of non-trolling players to play with and keep the population up? No fucking thank you.
"With so many people wanting to solo, why would you try to attract players to try your game with a weak race that needs large groups and isn’t balanced for the rest of the content?"
I chuckled at this particular line in the article. Yeah, I know, MMOs are basically single-player games nowadays. But it's amusing to see a title eager to slap new players in the face by telling them they need to group.
People might not like how they're planning to handle F2P players, but it certainly seems like they've put a lot of thought into it.
From the Eternal Crusade website (color emphasis is mine):
"Eternal Crusade will be available for digital purchase, with a free-to-play option we call “Free-to-Waaagh!”. By purchasing a copy of the game, you will have access to it forever with no need for a subscription. There will be post-launch expansions as well as a cash shop for aesthetic customizations and side-grades.
Is the game B2P then? If yes, I like their solution.
Trials for B2P games are always tricky... In this case, rather than limiting people in duration (free weekend), they limit people in power instead.
Comments
I think they should just do it like other games have in the past. The author mentioned LoL. I would also take a look at Mechwarrior online. If I recall correctly, you always get 4 or 5 new mechs to play for free (random picked mechs from all categories) every 2 weeks. If F2P had a chance to at least try out the other races, they will sell more.
If there are 4 classes per faction for example. Maybe only 1 out of the 4 will be available for F2P players to play. They wouldn't level up, or be able to change the gear. Just get a feeling of another factions playstyle. If they do add this, I don't think the current system would be too bad.
All the information is there no guessing required.
B2P pay once get all the races
Subscription is a discount on Store cash which increases the longer you're subed
http://forum.eternalcrusade.com/threads/founder-program-quick-info-compilation.9917/
did you hear that?
It's the bell of immolation calling for this one. It will burn!!!!!
Why shouldn't subscribers have an improved experience over F2P players?
I find it odd that there is a large pool of opinion that seems to lean towards giving the same experience to those who make no financial contribution whatsoever towards a game and those that do. IMO this is entirely wrong, those people who pay for a product should have a discernibly improved experience over those that do not.
To me this is the correct way to make a F2P game. It actually gives a benefit to subscribing. To me the morally dubious way of making a F2P game is to fill the cash shop with lots of gambling boxes.
I agree that P2P should have advantages over F2P .. Anyway from reading above if you sub you get stronger experience with orkz
and from what I remember Orkz were numerous in fights, a plague if you like, so you'd expect more F2P players all ganging up to attack P2P marines for example and winning just by numerical advantage.
sure aload might get slaughtered but they'd win, that's what the games aiming for I think. You can F2P and it makes it more like the game I remember, as long as players work together anyway.
What new laws? I'm from Europe myself so could you explain or send me a link, I'm really curious (no not a trolling post or what ever, i just haven't heard of it).
About the pay model in this game. I guess its a bit early still to give judgement. But when i look at Planetside 2, Heroes and Generals and APB (when i still played it), those games are F2P, sure you can pay real money and buy that weapon you want much more early. But those weapons are available for none paying customers as well. It just takes you longer, though in APB when i played it, it didn't take that long but you had to rebuy it every week or so..and even that was no problem as you got plenty of ingame currency. With Planetside 2 i even bought things cause they didn't force me what so ever, i just wanted to have it. Where with games that are F2P and say "give money or we will limit you!" i just quit playing.
I prefer a pay to play module though. I find MMORPG's with a sub better then F2P. This is my personal oppinion, you can disagree but i prefer to pay up a steady amount each month knowing i won't be hold back by investing more money then having to buy lose parts of the game that are always more expensive then having a sub. I don't want to pay 8 euro's for a inventory bag that only adds 10 more space.
Will be enjoying zerging paid players.
It is a bad idea, each faction should have had a f2p option, for orks-gretchin, for imperial-imperial guard, for Eldar-guardians and leave the paying players get Orks-boyz/nobz, imperial- Space Marines, and Eldar- Aspect warriors.
But what do I know, I am not ~IN~ the industry
I wish all games would do something like this. It gives the people who don't want to pay to play a chance to try out the game. I would like to see stuff like this more and less of the crap F2P stuff that happens now.
The only thing I can say is that this would be a nice way of getting rid of a box price on a game and launch it as a subscription/F2P model. The subscription should get things that the F2P's don't have access to. Races, Mounts, Housing, etc are all good ways to reward someone who supports a game thru subscription well enticing a F2P person to subscribe.
-Prior story writer for MMORPG.com
it doesnt matter because warhammer games are the harbinger of studio closures.
theyre cursed.
Games i'm playing right now...
"In short, I thought NGE was a very bad idea" - Raph Koster talking about NGE on his blog at raphkoster.com
the F2P model is why the game list on this site has hundreds of blah entries instead of a couple dozen really strong ones (which would be better).
I am a WH nerd (though i prefer warmachine/hordes) and it saddens me to see a WH game be cheapened in such a way as this, but if it's a colossal failure due to crappy F2P, maybe it will be the game that makes people in control of the purse strings at game studios think about reverting to the old, tried and true method of just having everyone pay the same damn amount per month (with, naturally, discounts for multimonth subs).
remember when the only games in town were the EQs, FF11, AO, Lineage2, AC SWG EvE (in its infancy) and UO? and they were ALL pretty good??
Me too.
RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.
Currently Playing EVE, ESO
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D Eisenhower
My optimism wears heavy boots and is loud.
Henry Rollins
No thanks, I think I'll pass... along with the $50~$60 and $15 a month I'm happy to pay for a game (F2P Or Sub) that's actually good. And I doubt I'm the only one that's going to say that.
Pay To Win never has worked and never will work and I'm delighted to see any game that tries die in a horrible fire.
It seems the Warhammer Intellectual Property goes to anyone who's willing to throw money at Games Workshop... regardless how inept they are at managing it.
The wrong way to do F2P is to do it in an MMORPG. Period. RPGs/MMORPGs are all about earning stuff. Earning. Not buying with cash (unless you're a complete loser). Xp, loot, items, everything - should be earned by playing, not paying. F2P for MMORPGs wouldn't work at all unless it involved pay 2 win and selling game data. So just stop it. It's sewage.
F2P MMORPGs are lower quality games for lower quality players or losers that want to pay for game data instead of earn it, and it's a business model for profit that benefits corporations, not gamers, not players.
F2P works excellently in other genres - for ex, it works great for MOBA, where it doesn't involve pay 2 win at all, and the gameplay doesn't revolve around a corruptible collecting of stuff. It's not affecting your ability to win at the game if you're paying $10 for a skin for your favorite champion, or even if you're buying a champion for cash that someone else gains thru playing, since no single champion is guaranteed win - it's just variety.
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
In addition, F2P is bad for MMORPG health and community. People who don't have to pay don't usually care, don't stick around, are just take up space and resources. The best MMORPGs are worth playing consistently and have people around who play consistently. I suppose in many of the crappy MMORPGs of today it doesn't matter as much since they're more like single player online games for dummies with ADD.
F2P helps games like MOBA since they're mostly PvP and having more bodies involved makes for fast matches and more variety of people to encounter.
MMORPGs IMO don't benefit from having more bodies involved, they benefit more from having more dedicated and quality people around, and F2P isn't the way to attract that quality, it's a way to get masses of people who don't give a crap.
Premium MMORPGs do not feature built-in cheating via cash for gold pay 2 win. PLAY to win or don't play.
Hopefully they can come up with a better way to make money from their game then this, going ahead with this setup is only likely to hurt them in the long-run.
Think about it like this, if you tried the game out for free and found you were so gimped and just getting ganked over and over, would you think the game is fun and worth sticking around to make that first critical paid transaction? I certainly would not.
The poster child for terrible FTP is Star Wars the old republic. Charging people for an extra action bar is laughable. I was a subscriber to the game, left for over a year, figured I'd come back to try the game FTP and BAM, couldn't get a 2nd action bar because it was locked behind a pay window. I immediately uninstalled the game and didn't look back. Not that I don't have $20 a month, but the entire business practice turned me off and I refuse to support it.
The best FTP game I've played has been Marvel Heroes (more of an action RPG) and the best BTP (But to play) so far has been Guild Wars 2. Dying to try The Secret World though, have heard great things.
I chuckled at this particular line in the article. Yeah, I know, MMOs are basically single-player games nowadays. But it's amusing to see a title eager to slap new players in the face by telling them they need to group.
People might not like how they're planning to handle F2P players, but it certainly seems like they've put a lot of thought into it.
Is the game B2P then? If yes, I like their solution.
Trials for B2P games are always tricky... In this case, rather than limiting people in duration (free weekend), they limit people in power instead.