f2p is the current best approach to the market if you have a nice little mmo-game, that wasn't so expensive in development. for mmogs with a bigger budget, like 100 m $ plus, it has been and will be the better financial strategy to release with a retail version and monthly fee on top and convert to f2p after 6-12 months. any high budget game in the last years did it and they had their reasons. that said i fear that we won't get many big budget mmogs in the future. maybe ncsoft, as the biggest pure mmog publisher will continue, will see a chance to fill the gap, but they need to deliver more persistent games (not like wildstar) or follow arenanets b2p concept.
companies now concentrate to develop smaller specialized games for specified target groups with way less money and financial risk. and they all will be labeled as 'play for free' or 'free to play'. the competition and fight for customers will force them to ease up their greediness within the cashshops (unless the game is based on a well known ip).
I had to double check the date on the OP's post to make sure this wasn't some crazy necro thread. Just looking at my screen I see three advertisements with "Play for free" and "Play Free" in huge letters. You know what would take the market by surprise? A game advertisement that had in big bold letters, "Pay to Play!" "Subscription Required!"
Every game on the site is included in that list. Dragon Age: Inquisition is there, are you telling me that's an MMO? How about Dark Souls II or Divinity Original Sin? Are those also magically mmo's now just because they're on that list?
Since 2005, every MMO that was released as P2P was a catastrophic failure (except FFXIV's 2nd launch). The most recent examples are ESO and Wildstar which are already completely deserted.
Are you even playing ESO or are you just one of those f2p/p2w trolls?
Or Wildstar. Servers that aren't Pergo or Stormtalon are dead because most people have used the free transfer to those already. ESO and Wildstar are nowhere NEAR as dead as mmorpg forums would have anyone believe.
I can fly higher than an aeroplane. And I have the voice of a thousand hurricanes. Hurt - Wars
Every game on the site is included in that list. Dragon Age: Inquisition is there, are you telling me that's an MMO? How about Dark Souls II or Divinity Original Sin? Are those also magically mmo's now just because they're on that list?
Define: MMO
A massively multiplayer online game (also called MMO and MMOG) is a multiplayer video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously. By necessity, they are played on the Internet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game
By the modern definition of MMO, many online games qualify. This includes MOBA's, many FPS games, Mobile games, even Facbook Games. Farmville alone trumps WoW easily.
F2P is the most popular form of MMO globally, and in the west. The most popular form of payment for these is subscription/timecards (i.e. F2P is predominatly sub monetized). WoW is a P2P game, with a monthly sub (in the west). The vast majority of the monthly playerbase for WoW use timecards and are located in Asia.
Reality is completely free to play is the new player in town and it's taking the market rapidly by surprise. Fact is the bigger the playerbase you attract, the better it is for your product, free advertising through word of mouth and more potential players more potential ways to get $ floating to your product.
Well, therein lies the issue.
Aiming for the possible broadest market, with all the dilution, simplification, and homogenisation that brings, is what has all but killed this genre already.
And now you tell me that a model that demands that on steroids will be it's future?
Sounds grisly and not something I will be part of.
Bottom line is, why pay to enjoy a game when I'm already enjoying another one for free? The free will always have priority.
Really? Because for me, fun is always the priority.
You people that put "free" at the top of your requirements for how you spend your (I presume) precious leisure confuse me... If a game is good enough for my time, then it is good enough for me to pay for. It it wasn't, no way would I put time into it. No way would I ever put my time into something less fun just because it was cheaper.
No game has ever been made more fun or more playing for me because it's "free". Never has paying a sub ruined my enjoyment of a good game.
Look at the current market... F2P doesn't even dominate MMORPGs in the West now as we are continously told it does. Hybrid models do.
Even after all this time, all this spin, people still WANT to pay to play.
And as in COMPLETLY free to play...League of Legends is best example and MMORPG's should start adopting this. Reality is the experienced gamer can enjoy a lot of great games free out there to justify paying for a game these days, especially one with sub attached.
MMORPG's should start adopting a more modern payment model if they want to stay competitive and attractive. Payment models such as adding advertisement ingame that fits for the virtual world. Have system in place where players are welcome to donate if they enjoy the product, but give them limited recognition, like supporter tag on forums, something like Path of Exile does.
Reality is completely free to play is the new player in town and it's taking the market rapidly by surprise. Fact is the bigger the playerbase you attract, the better it is for your product, free advertising through word of mouth and more potential players more potential ways to get $ floating to your product.
So, I won't be surprised at all if the next AAA MMORPG's coming in the next few years come completely free to play. Times are indeed changing and for the better for us the players. I've bought every single expensaion on release for WOW since launch, but it won't be the case anymore.
Bottom line is, why pay to enjoy a game when I'm already enjoying another one for free? The free will always have priority.
You're wrong. Sorry, LoL is an example of a broken model. It's like saying that all games should be subscription because WoW is.
Sure, LoL made $600 million dollars last year. Nothing to sneeze at. However, they required 67 million active monthly players in order to accomplish that. WoW makes double the amount of money with 7 million subscribers. Unfortunately, it's not a sustainable model.
If a game that was even moderately successful, say Rift, were to take on a LoL model, they'd shrivel up and die. Especially if we're talking about new games, games without proven track records, games trying to make some money back on their investment.
F2P + cash shop is the present for many games, and future to remaining P2P games.
My educated guess - for some it will come sooner (ESO, WS) than later (WoW, FF14ARR)
Other smaller niche games (like Darkfall) can remain P2P as long as their operational costs are kept small (small team, small number of servers) - so they don't require a large playerbase to keep going.
No idea how WS is doing, but ESO seems fine, and a lot of the people playing comment in game chat that F2P would drive them away, F2P brings in the rift raft and ends up costing more than a sub if you really get into one. No, I don't see F2P as the only model going forward and have read as much from developers.
When I said i had "time", i meant virtual time, i got no RL "time" for you.
Originally posted by DMKanoF2P + cash shop is the present for many games, and future to remaining P2P games.My educated guess - for some it will come sooner (ESO, WS) than later (WoW, FF14ARR)Other smaller niche games (like Darkfall) can remain P2P as long as their operational costs are kept small (small team, small number of servers) - so they don't require a large playerbase to keep going.
These same points were made about email services in the early 2000's. Everyone said that free email was junk, and that no one would ever take it seriously.
Today free email is the standard... but paid email is still doing just fine. They satisfy different needs, just like free vs paid gaming. The future is likely to be very similar, with free being the standard, but with paid models doing just fine as well.
Look at the current market... F2P doesn't even dominate MMORPGs in the West now as we are continously told it does. Hybrid models do.
Even after all this time, all this spin, people still WANT to pay to play.
While I'm not a nitpicky person, I'd point out that mostly the reason hybrid sells is because it unlocks more content when you use it. I think it'd be more accurate to say people are willing to pay for a game, or perhaps that people aren't averse to paying for a game, but not that people want to pay for a game.
By way of example, my Dragonborn pack in Neverwinter is something I would prefer not to pay for, if given the choice. I'm relatively certain virtually anyone would agree with me. However, for the game and for the product, I didn't mind paying for it because it offered me a value that I wanted. But that aside, I agree with your sentiment that people don't generally mind paying for a game (although I'd contest that people are willing to buy a game sight-unseen or -unplayed much these days). However, I think that's more to do with capitalism than anything involving the instrinsic value of f2p games; sub games, and their failure to live up to their promise, have all but assured that f2p/pay-as-you-will (any f2p game that includes some monetization, be it sub, cash shops, or what-have-you) will emerge victorious as the future pricing model.
Originally posted by kamerian1 Personally, I could care less if mmo's go f2p....as long as they also offer a sub option. I prefer to play my mmo's without feeling like they are "nickle and dime'ing" me to death.
The problem is that once a really elaborate cash-shop is constructed it tends to creep across the line to the subscribers too. In SWTOR there are tons of game features, convenience options and boosts that either require you to spend massive amounts of in-game currency or make an easy purchase at the cash shop.
It becomes a slippery slope. Even for subscribers they gate desirable features behind high cost or rep requirements and then push you to buy cartel coins with additional money.
For example, if you subscribe to SWTOR most races wont be available to you at character creation. You buy them with additional money or you first make a character of a race you might not want and then grind out tons of in-game currency.
This times a thousand is how the cash shop degrades a game even for subscribers.
There are other MMO games that aren't listed on this site.
the "All MMO games" is misleading.
They're in the process of fixing that mess of a list so everything isn't all clumped into one heap. He already knows this though, but will undoubtedly cling on tightly until the bitter end when it's finally been tidied up.
Anyone who's spent any time playing a MOBA can easily see within a few minutes that these games are not MMOs of any sort. It's strange and unusual that any gamer would even feel the need or desire to lump MOBAs with MMOs. I've been playing DOTA 2 like crazy lately, this is not an MMO, lol. Yikes.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
F2p is forced upon other games by the dominance of world of warcraft, even at 10 years old the game still dominates the genre and forces the other games to have to give themselves away for free.
Originally posted by Battlerock F2p is forced upon other games by the dominance of world of warcraft, even at 10 years old the game still dominates the genre and forces the other games to have to give themselves away for free.
Wrong. You can't blame anyone else for your own failure to deliver a successful product and capture/create a market for it. People, the players/consumers want one thing (or know what they want), producers/developers release something else and today that is the results we see.
Since I got my PC in 2001 I've enjoyed such amazing MMORPG's over a decade+. Sadly, its almost 4 years since I've last spent $ on a new MMORPG and it's not cuz I'm burned out of MMORPG's, it's cuz I've been fortunate to experience a lot of great MMORPG's so I have a standard set in place and I vote with my wallet.
This year I only spent $15 in February on monthly WOW sub. The genre is simply in a bad shape so I moved away from it toward completely free to play ARPGs and FPS for the time being. F2P is not forced upon other MMORPG's, but they are aware that the products they deliver are nothing significantly greater than what this genre been flooded with, thus explains their F2P approach.
The biggest irony is how I have disks of Star Wars Galaxies taking dust...and being unable to play what I've bought just cuz some greedy snob out there said so. Im sure they could've let 1-2 classic SWG servers relaunched for the sake of those who paid $ for it and keeping their reputation. If you were only aware how many people hate/dislike SOE and Disney (who bought Lucas Art) today cuz they failed to come up with some agreement thx to greed.
SWG and SWTOR are 2 completely different games and I'm sure if 2 SWG servers exist it would not be the end of the world for SWTOR.
I disagree about the fact that f2p is the way of the future. Personally I find free to play mmo's lacking substance and soul, everything within a free to play game is built around trying to get money out of the player.
Just look at all the loot boxes you find in Neverwinter and Star Trek and the awful drop rates of the equipment they advertise vs the cost of the keys. This in itself rips any sort of soul out of a game if it had one to begin with.
The fact that in LOTRO you can buy all the recipes from the store and even tools to make them, and that you also need to buy classes and in some cases a race like they have in other games.
I prefer pay to play mmo's and will remain with them, the day that all pay to play mmos die I will stop playing mmo's and just keep to single player games.
Planetside 2 is another popular game released by SOE, which I never played due to the hacking rumors around that plagued it.
Its really hard to find blatant cheater in PS2 and few subtle cheaters in army vs. army brawl don't make any difference. Too easy to detect big hax stuff in FPS thanks to simple mechanics. I'd say, cheaters is PS2's least concern atm. RPGs with all their economics, crafting, traveling, gear mechanics are way more prone to cheats and harder to clean.
On topic: no, there always will be enough people who want to throw money in cashshop for some advantage, no reasons to not take all that dough. So different models will be viable in future.
Anyone who's spent any time playing a MOBA can easily see within a few minutes that these games are not MMOs of any sort. It's strange and unusual that any gamer would even feel the need or desire to lump MOBAs with MMOs. I've been playing DOTA 2 like crazy lately, this is not an MMO, lol. Yikes.
It is ... if the definition of MMO is continuously broadened.
How about World of Tank? It is listed as a MMO in many places, including many reviews, and yet it has no persistent world. How about Vindictus? How about Marvel Heroes?
MOBA may be a little out there compared to these other games, but it is a continuum, not black & white as many would like it to be. Like it or not, the market and the industry is no longer treating only the "traditional" MMOs as MMOs. Now the term is broadened.
Anyone who's spent any time playing a MOBA can easily see within a few minutes that these games are not MMOs of any sort. It's strange and unusual that any gamer would even feel the need or desire to lump MOBAs with MMOs. I've been playing DOTA 2 like crazy lately, this is not an MMO, lol. Yikes.
It is ... if the definition of MMO is continuously broadened.
How about World of Tank? TPS. It is listed as a MMO in many places, including many reviews, and yet it has no persistent world. How about Vindictus? Never touched this one, so I cannot comment. How about Marvel Heroes? ARPG.
MOBA may be a little out there compared to these other games, but it is a continuum, not black & white as many would like it to be. Like it or not, the market and the industry is no longer treating only the "traditional" MMOs as MMOs. Now the term is broadened. Sure, they are marketing many games these days as MMOs, but that's what happens with marketing, they try to get you to open your wallet any way they can. 600K people just resubbed to a 10 year old MMO because of an expansion. This doesn't go unnoticed obviously. This site has openly admitted that they are going to be covering a lot more RPGs due to the lack of news and releases with respect to MMOs. They have to survive, right? This doesn't automatically transform RPGs into MMOs.
The industry is clearly attempting to broaden the terminology and MMO focused websites will strive to remain relevant, but the dust will inevitably settle, and aside from a few dedicated forum posters that thrive on arguing incessantly, your average Joe can easily see the difference between an MMO and a MOBA/ARPG/FPS etc. Video game genres have always and will always borrow ideas and features from each other, but this cross pollination doesn't simply throw every video game into the same bin. I will say though that it is amusing to observe first hand how easily some people are manipulated by marketing. It's fascinating and fun
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
OP is dead wrong. F2P will always be around but it will never be a model for a successful AAA MMO. $15/mo. is totally acceptable for the consumers in this industry so long as the game isn't a total flop.
I agree that MOST games will either be designed F2P or become F2P after they fail as a subscriber model.
I disagree about the fact that f2p is the way of the future. Personally I find free to play mmo's lacking substance and soul, everything within a free to play game is built around trying to get money out of the player.
I prefer pay to play mmo's and will remain with them, the day that all pay to play mmos die I will stop playing mmo's and just keep to single player games.
That is your preference.
I find a few F2P MMO (Marvel Hero, and the aforementioned STO) fun enough to play. And yes, they are designed to get money out of whale but at least in the games I play, they can be ignored (by me obviously), and I can still enjoy the games (otherwise, why would i even play?)
Anyone who's spent any time playing a MOBA can easily see within a few minutes that these games are not MMOs of any sort. It's strange and unusual that any gamer would even feel the need or desire to lump MOBAs with MMOs. I've been playing DOTA 2 like crazy lately, this is not an MMO, lol. Yikes.
It is ... if the definition of MMO is continuously broadened.
How about World of Tank? TPS. It is listed as a MMO in many places, including many reviews, and yet it has no persistent world. How about Vindictus? Never touched this one, so I cannot comment. How about Marvel Heroes? ARPG.
MOBA may be a little out there compared to these other games, but it is a continuum, not black & white as many would like it to be. Like it or not, the market and the industry is no longer treating only the "traditional" MMOs as MMOs. Now the term is broadened. Sure, they are marketing many games these days as MMOs, but that's what happens with marketing, they try to get you to open your wallet any way they can. 600K people just resubbed to a 10 year old MMO because of an expansion. This doesn't go unnoticed obviously. This site has openly admitted that they are going to be covering a lot more RPGs due to the lack of news and releases with respect to MMOs. They have to survive, right? This doesn't automatically transform RPGs into MMOs.
The industry is clearly attempting to broaden the terminology and MMO focused websites will strive to remain relevant, but the dust will inevitably settle, and aside from a few dedicated forum posters that thrive on arguing incessantly, your average Joe can easily see the difference between an MMO and a MOBA/ARPG/FPS etc. Video game genres have always and will always borrow ideas and features from each other, but this cross pollination doesn't simply throw every video game into the same bin. I will say though that it is amusing to observe first hand how easily some people are manipulated by marketed. It's fascinating and fun
It is equally amusing to see people struggling to come up with a narrative to match their narrow world view. And being passive aggressive about it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been-Wayne Gretzky
Comments
f2p is the current best approach to the market if you have a nice little mmo-game, that wasn't so expensive in development. for mmogs with a bigger budget, like 100 m $ plus, it has been and will be the better financial strategy to release with a retail version and monthly fee on top and convert to f2p after 6-12 months. any high budget game in the last years did it and they had their reasons. that said i fear that we won't get many big budget mmogs in the future. maybe ncsoft, as the biggest pure mmog publisher will continue, will see a chance to fill the gap, but they need to deliver more persistent games (not like wildstar) or follow arenanets b2p concept.
companies now concentrate to develop smaller specialized games for specified target groups with way less money and financial risk. and they all will be labeled as 'play for free' or 'free to play'. the competition and fight for customers will force them to ease up their greediness within the cashshops (unless the game is based on a well known ip).
and LoL is classified as one on this site, many other MMO sites, and industrial analysts firms.
No, it's classified as a MOBA on this site, see link http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/436 which probably has something to do with the fact that it is a MOBA.
F2P is the new player in town?
It's taking the market by surprise?
I had to double check the date on the OP's post to make sure this wasn't some crazy necro thread. Just looking at my screen I see three advertisements with "Play for free" and "Play Free" in huge letters. You know what would take the market by surprise? A game advertisement that had in big bold letters, "Pay to Play!" "Subscription Required!"
and yet it is listed under "All MMO Games" on http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm, which implies MOBA is a sub-genre of MMOs.
Every game on the site is included in that list. Dragon Age: Inquisition is there, are you telling me that's an MMO? How about Dark Souls II or Divinity Original Sin? Are those also magically mmo's now just because they're on that list?
Or Wildstar. Servers that aren't Pergo or Stormtalon are dead because most people have used the free transfer to those already. ESO and Wildstar are nowhere NEAR as dead as mmorpg forums would have anyone believe.
I can fly higher than an aeroplane.
And I have the voice of a thousand hurricanes.
Hurt - Wars
Define: MMO
A massively multiplayer online game (also called MMO and MMOG) is a multiplayer video game which is capable of supporting large numbers of players simultaneously. By necessity, they are played on the Internet
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_game
By the modern definition of MMO, many online games qualify. This includes MOBA's, many FPS games, Mobile games, even Facbook Games. Farmville alone trumps WoW easily.
F2P is the most popular form of MMO globally, and in the west. The most popular form of payment for these is subscription/timecards (i.e. F2P is predominatly sub monetized). WoW is a P2P game, with a monthly sub (in the west). The vast majority of the monthly playerbase for WoW use timecards and are located in Asia.
Well, therein lies the issue.
Aiming for the possible broadest market, with all the dilution, simplification, and homogenisation that brings, is what has all but killed this genre already.
And now you tell me that a model that demands that on steroids will be it's future?
Sounds grisly and not something I will be part of.
Really? Because for me, fun is always the priority.
You people that put "free" at the top of your requirements for how you spend your (I presume) precious leisure confuse me... If a game is good enough for my time, then it is good enough for me to pay for. It it wasn't, no way would I put time into it. No way would I ever put my time into something less fun just because it was cheaper.
No game has ever been made more fun or more playing for me because it's "free". Never has paying a sub ruined my enjoyment of a good game.
Look at the current market... F2P doesn't even dominate MMORPGs in the West now as we are continously told it does. Hybrid models do.
Even after all this time, all this spin, people still WANT to pay to play.
You're wrong. Sorry, LoL is an example of a broken model. It's like saying that all games should be subscription because WoW is.
Sure, LoL made $600 million dollars last year. Nothing to sneeze at. However, they required 67 million active monthly players in order to accomplish that. WoW makes double the amount of money with 7 million subscribers. Unfortunately, it's not a sustainable model.
If a game that was even moderately successful, say Rift, were to take on a LoL model, they'd shrivel up and die. Especially if we're talking about new games, games without proven track records, games trying to make some money back on their investment.
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
No idea how WS is doing, but ESO seems fine, and a lot of the people playing comment in game chat that F2P would drive them away, F2P brings in the rift raft and ends up costing more than a sub if you really get into one. No, I don't see F2P as the only model going forward and have read as much from developers.
When I said i had "time", i meant virtual time, i got no RL "time" for you.
These same points were made about email services in the early 2000's. Everyone said that free email was junk, and that no one would ever take it seriously.
Today free email is the standard... but paid email is still doing just fine. They satisfy different needs, just like free vs paid gaming. The future is likely to be very similar, with free being the standard, but with paid models doing just fine as well.
I've heard this several years ago. It falls under the same category with mobile gaming is the future and next year is the year of Linux.
So forgive me if I'm not shocked.
While I'm not a nitpicky person, I'd point out that mostly the reason hybrid sells is because it unlocks more content when you use it. I think it'd be more accurate to say people are willing to pay for a game, or perhaps that people aren't averse to paying for a game, but not that people want to pay for a game.
By way of example, my Dragonborn pack in Neverwinter is something I would prefer not to pay for, if given the choice. I'm relatively certain virtually anyone would agree with me. However, for the game and for the product, I didn't mind paying for it because it offered me a value that I wanted. But that aside, I agree with your sentiment that people don't generally mind paying for a game (although I'd contest that people are willing to buy a game sight-unseen or -unplayed much these days). However, I think that's more to do with capitalism than anything involving the instrinsic value of f2p games; sub games, and their failure to live up to their promise, have all but assured that f2p/pay-as-you-will (any f2p game that includes some monetization, be it sub, cash shops, or what-have-you) will emerge victorious as the future pricing model.
The problem is that once a really elaborate cash-shop is constructed it tends to creep across the line to the subscribers too. In SWTOR there are tons of game features, convenience options and boosts that either require you to spend massive amounts of in-game currency or make an easy purchase at the cash shop.
It becomes a slippery slope. Even for subscribers they gate desirable features behind high cost or rep requirements and then push you to buy cartel coins with additional money.
For example, if you subscribe to SWTOR most races wont be available to you at character creation. You buy them with additional money or you first make a character of a race you might not want and then grind out tons of in-game currency.
This times a thousand is how the cash shop degrades a game even for subscribers.
They're in the process of fixing that mess of a list so everything isn't all clumped into one heap. He already knows this though, but will undoubtedly cling on tightly until the bitter end when it's finally been tidied up.
Anyone who's spent any time playing a MOBA can easily see within a few minutes that these games are not MMOs of any sort. It's strange and unusual that any gamer would even feel the need or desire to lump MOBAs with MMOs. I've been playing DOTA 2 like crazy lately, this is not an MMO, lol. Yikes.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Wrong. You can't blame anyone else for your own failure to deliver a successful product and capture/create a market for it. People, the players/consumers want one thing (or know what they want), producers/developers release something else and today that is the results we see.
Since I got my PC in 2001 I've enjoyed such amazing MMORPG's over a decade+. Sadly, its almost 4 years since I've last spent $ on a new MMORPG and it's not cuz I'm burned out of MMORPG's, it's cuz I've been fortunate to experience a lot of great MMORPG's so I have a standard set in place and I vote with my wallet.
This year I only spent $15 in February on monthly WOW sub. The genre is simply in a bad shape so I moved away from it toward completely free to play ARPGs and FPS for the time being. F2P is not forced upon other MMORPG's, but they are aware that the products they deliver are nothing significantly greater than what this genre been flooded with, thus explains their F2P approach.
The biggest irony is how I have disks of Star Wars Galaxies taking dust...and being unable to play what I've bought just cuz some greedy snob out there said so. Im sure they could've let 1-2 classic SWG servers relaunched for the sake of those who paid $ for it and keeping their reputation. If you were only aware how many people hate/dislike SOE and Disney (who bought Lucas Art) today cuz they failed to come up with some agreement thx to greed.
SWG and SWTOR are 2 completely different games and I'm sure if 2 SWG servers exist it would not be the end of the world for SWTOR.
I disagree about the fact that f2p is the way of the future. Personally I find free to play mmo's lacking substance and soul, everything within a free to play game is built around trying to get money out of the player.
Just look at all the loot boxes you find in Neverwinter and Star Trek and the awful drop rates of the equipment they advertise vs the cost of the keys. This in itself rips any sort of soul out of a game if it had one to begin with.
The fact that in LOTRO you can buy all the recipes from the store and even tools to make them, and that you also need to buy classes and in some cases a race like they have in other games.
I prefer pay to play mmo's and will remain with them, the day that all pay to play mmos die I will stop playing mmo's and just keep to single player games.
Its really hard to find blatant cheater in PS2 and few subtle cheaters in army vs. army brawl don't make any difference. Too easy to detect big hax stuff in FPS thanks to simple mechanics. I'd say, cheaters is PS2's least concern atm. RPGs with all their economics, crafting, traveling, gear mechanics are way more prone to cheats and harder to clean.
On topic: no, there always will be enough people who want to throw money in cashshop for some advantage, no reasons to not take all that dough. So different models will be viable in future.
It is ... if the definition of MMO is continuously broadened.
How about World of Tank? It is listed as a MMO in many places, including many reviews, and yet it has no persistent world. How about Vindictus? How about Marvel Heroes?
MOBA may be a little out there compared to these other games, but it is a continuum, not black & white as many would like it to be. Like it or not, the market and the industry is no longer treating only the "traditional" MMOs as MMOs. Now the term is broadened.
The industry is clearly attempting to broaden the terminology and MMO focused websites will strive to remain relevant, but the dust will inevitably settle, and aside from a few dedicated forum posters that thrive on arguing incessantly, your average Joe can easily see the difference between an MMO and a MOBA/ARPG/FPS etc. Video game genres have always and will always borrow ideas and features from each other, but this cross pollination doesn't simply throw every video game into the same bin. I will say though that it is amusing to observe first hand how easily some people are manipulated by marketing. It's fascinating and fun
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
OP is dead wrong. F2P will always be around but it will never be a model for a successful AAA MMO. $15/mo. is totally acceptable for the consumers in this industry so long as the game isn't a total flop.
I agree that MOST games will either be designed F2P or become F2P after they fail as a subscriber model.
That is your preference.
I find a few F2P MMO (Marvel Hero, and the aforementioned STO) fun enough to play. And yes, they are designed to get money out of whale but at least in the games I play, they can be ignored (by me obviously), and I can still enjoy the games (otherwise, why would i even play?)
It is equally amusing to see people struggling to come up with a narrative to match their narrow world view. And being passive aggressive about it.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky