My guess is because the people willing to buy the game have already. Also its how many people you can net as fast as you can in the hopes some use your cash shop.
Generally because part of the purpose of converting to F2P is eliminating any barrier to entry.
"Oh, it's free to play now?! I'll check that out."
And then hopefully they get hooked and like the game enough to spend some money later on.
B2P still leaves some barrier to entry, which for a lot of people automatically just makes them say "eh...I don't know..."
The upfront cost, however, does give the game at least some appearance of being more "premium" than a F2P game. Especially for older MMO gamers. I think that's a big reason why TSW did their conversion to B2P because the box price would still tell older gamers which is more their target audience that this isn't just another F2P.
Originally posted by Alverant I feel that a game connected to a server that needs constant monitoring should have a monthly cost.
Why?
Tons of games have servers and never charge a month costs ... all Blizz games, alll FPS with a MP mode, and so on and so forth.
In short, you would have to remove the 'persistent world' factor from the game, it all costs, from the upkeep and power usage from the server blades running them, to the secure log-ins and firewall protection to ensure that the servers themselves are not compromised, to the amount of bandwidth each server uses, multiplayer games are able to hand off that side of things to the players own PC's usually through peer networking, they only have to host the 'lobby' which is far far cheaper, and uses very little in the way of bandwidth. And thats just the obvious stuff, before we get involved with customer support and account handling, something multi player games tend to do in a very 'lite' fashion.
Have many P2P MMOs gone "true F2P?" I know many of the ones I know of went "Freemium", which still had a sub option, but no longer "required" a base game purchase. EQ1, SW:TOR, Rift off of the top of my head all still have a sub option, I think.
Originally posted by Dreamo84 Generally because part of the purpose of converting to F2P is eliminating any barrier to entry."Oh, it's free to play now?! I'll check that out."And then hopefully they get hooked and like the game enough to spend some money later on.B2P still leaves some barrier to entry, which for a lot of people automatically just makes them say "eh...I don't know..."The upfront cost, however, does give the game at least some appearance of being more "premium" than a F2P game. Especially for older MMO gamers. I think that's a big reason why TSW did their conversion to B2P because the box price would still tell older gamers which is more their target audience that this isn't just another F2P.
This was my thinking, too. A big reason why MMOs opt to go F2P is to get players into the game, in order to make more money: attract the whales who apparently do not buy boxes but make a mad dash to the cash shops. <shrug>
Another thing that popped into my head when I read the OP was all the expansions that P2P MMOs released. Maybe that does not factor in, but when EQ1 went "Freemium", they had like 20+ expansions already. I am not sure, but do most of the "switched over" MMOs still charge for expansions?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Originally posted by Alverant I feel that a game connected to a server that needs constant monitoring should have a monthly cost.
Why?
Tons of games have servers and never charge a month costs ... all Blizz games, alll FPS with a MP mode, and so on and so forth.
In short, you would have to remove the 'persistent world' factor from the game, it all costs, from the upkeep and power usage from the server blades running them, to the secure log-ins and firewall protection to ensure that the servers themselves are not compromised, to the amount of bandwidth each server uses, multiplayer games are able to hand off that side of things to the players own PC's usually through peer networking, they only have to host the 'lobby' which is far far cheaper, and uses very little in the way of bandwidth. And thats just the obvious stuff, before we get involved with customer support and account handling, something multi player games tend to do in a very 'lite' fashion.
Clearly that is not the case for D3, where everything is happening at the server side, and you cannot cheat by changing data on the client side.
Plus, many MMOs have minimize, if not eliminate the persistent world anyway.
Because most of the money is made from cashshop anyway.
And buy to play just create a barrier that stops new players from trying the game.
The truth is if those games goes by 2 play, they'll go bankrupt soon. Unless they keep pushing out DLC. Or stop updating the games to cut operating cost.
Originally posted by Alverant I feel that a game connected to a server that needs constant monitoring should have a monthly cost.
Why?
Tons of games have servers and never charge a month costs ... all Blizz games, alll FPS with a MP mode, and so on and so forth.
In short, you would have to remove the 'persistent world' factor from the game, it all costs, from the upkeep and power usage from the server blades running them, to the secure log-ins and firewall protection to ensure that the servers themselves are not compromised, to the amount of bandwidth each server uses, multiplayer games are able to hand off that side of things to the players own PC's usually through peer networking, they only have to host the 'lobby' which is far far cheaper, and uses very little in the way of bandwidth. And thats just the obvious stuff, before we get involved with customer support and account handling, something multi player games tend to do in a very 'lite' fashion.
Clearly that is not the case for D3, where everything is happening at the server side, and you cannot cheat by changing data on the client side.
Plus, many MMOs have minimize, if not eliminate the persistent world anyway.
You need to look at it in a few ways. I dont' know how much diablo 3 cost to make. But diablo 2 only cost like 10 million.
Compare that to the mmorpg that cost 100+ million to make and 20-30 million addition per year.
And you are comparing a game which sold 15 million copies. I'm pretty sure path of exile wont' sale that many copies.
The expection for mmorpg, is people expect it to keep growing so developer need to spend a good amount of money to keep people playing.
For FPS, the developer just stop developing and put it to autorun and make a new updated fps.
Originally posted by Alverant I feel that a game connected to a server that needs constant monitoring should have a monthly cost.
Why?
Tons of games have servers and never charge a month costs ... all Blizz games, alll FPS with a MP mode, and so on and so forth.
In short, you would have to remove the 'persistent world' factor from the game, it all costs, from the upkeep and power usage from the server blades running them, to the secure log-ins and firewall protection to ensure that the servers themselves are not compromised, to the amount of bandwidth each server uses, multiplayer games are able to hand off that side of things to the players own PC's usually through peer networking, they only have to host the 'lobby' which is far far cheaper, and uses very little in the way of bandwidth. And thats just the obvious stuff, before we get involved with customer support and account handling, something multi player games tend to do in a very 'lite' fashion.
Clearly that is not the case for D3, where everything is happening at the server side, and you cannot cheat by changing data on the client side.
Plus, many MMOs have minimize, if not eliminate the persistent world anyway.
You need to look at it in a few ways. I dont' know how much diablo 3 cost to make. But diablo 2 only cost like 10 million.
Compare that to the mmorpg that cost 100+ million to make and 20-30 million addition per year.
And you are comparing a game which sold 15 million copies. I'm pretty sure path of exile wont' sale that many copies.
The expection for mmorpg, is people expect it to keep growing so developer need to spend a good amount of money to keep people playing.
For FPS, the developer just stop developing and put it to autorun and make a new updated fps.
Tsk tsk tsk. Diablo 2 costed 10 million, do account for inflation too. Diablo 3 took around 12 years to make. The developing was restarted on multiple occasions. Think again.
Very few MMOs costed 100+ million to make. For instance, Tera in all its beauty and with inflation adjustment costed ~50 mil to make. Quite a lot to go until it hits the 100 mil mark
The amount of misguided people on these boards is so high, I don't want to live on this planet anymore. You don't understand how software works. And you think you do the right thing by paying a subscription. Sure that was okay 10 years ago when it costed a little fortune to host one but today .....its nowhere near that. Especially the shit we've been fed recently.
You people don't know how software works. Compared to ANY other industry, as a developer,
- you don't pay for licenses
- you can sell billions of copies for $0. It costs you NOTHING to copy/paste a project. Software development has huge upfront cost but after that you can sit on your ass and get piles of money, just by sitting on your arse.
- you have operational costs but!
bcbully recently said that TESO made 110,000,000 out of physical copies alone. Rumor has it the game was worth 200kk to make. Given people buy a lot more digitally, lets say the game is sitting on ~300-350kk in the first 6 months
Are you seriously implying that a game cannot be run with 100 mil for a year? Do you know how 100 mil even looks like <o>
Naturally with software development you would develop a new product, as followed.
High upfront costs, create a DLC/expack, sell it to people. By gauging your active userbase, and having ~30% minimal convert rate you can calculate profits.
What modern games are doing?
1) Purchase a box with "free" time worth 1/4th of the box price (what is the box for <o>)
2) Offer subscription fee (I like to call it rental)
3) Tell your consumerist fan base how hard it is to manage a modern MMO so they can go and apologize on your behalf on the internet, defending your business model.
4) Invest money, high upfront cost, produce a new DLC/expack, which btw is cheaper to produce because you already have the engine, you have all the systems already working, so techincally you create bunch of skills, some maps and some quests. And some new character models (sometimes, not always)
5) SELL IT TO PEOPLE WHO OTHERWISE PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ALREADY (E.g. WoW, FFXIV)
On second thought ... fuck it, you guys deserve to be screwed.
Comments
Generally because part of the purpose of converting to F2P is eliminating any barrier to entry.
"Oh, it's free to play now?! I'll check that out."
And then hopefully they get hooked and like the game enough to spend some money later on.
B2P still leaves some barrier to entry, which for a lot of people automatically just makes them say "eh...I don't know..."
The upfront cost, however, does give the game at least some appearance of being more "premium" than a F2P game. Especially for older MMO gamers. I think that's a big reason why TSW did their conversion to B2P because the box price would still tell older gamers which is more their target audience that this isn't just another F2P.
Pretty much this. B2P still poses a significant entry barrier.
Mission in life: Vanquish all MMORPG.com trolls - especially TESO, WOW and GW2 trolls.
Why?
Tons of games have servers and never charge a month costs ... all Blizz games, alll FPS with a MP mode, and so on and so forth.
In short, you would have to remove the 'persistent world' factor from the game, it all costs, from the upkeep and power usage from the server blades running them, to the secure log-ins and firewall protection to ensure that the servers themselves are not compromised, to the amount of bandwidth each server uses, multiplayer games are able to hand off that side of things to the players own PC's usually through peer networking, they only have to host the 'lobby' which is far far cheaper, and uses very little in the way of bandwidth. And thats just the obvious stuff, before we get involved with customer support and account handling, something multi player games tend to do in a very 'lite' fashion.
Have many P2P MMOs gone "true F2P?" I know many of the ones I know of went "Freemium", which still had a sub option, but no longer "required" a base game purchase. EQ1, SW:TOR, Rift off of the top of my head all still have a sub option, I think.
This was my thinking, too. A big reason why MMOs opt to go F2P is to get players into the game, in order to make more money: attract the whales who apparently do not buy boxes but make a mad dash to the cash shops. <shrug>Another thing that popped into my head when I read the OP was all the expansions that P2P MMOs released. Maybe that does not factor in, but when EQ1 went "Freemium", they had like 20+ expansions already. I am not sure, but do most of the "switched over" MMOs still charge for expansions?
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Clearly that is not the case for D3, where everything is happening at the server side, and you cannot cheat by changing data on the client side.
Plus, many MMOs have minimize, if not eliminate the persistent world anyway.
Because most of the money is made from cashshop anyway.
And buy to play just create a barrier that stops new players from trying the game.
The truth is if those games goes by 2 play, they'll go bankrupt soon. Unless they keep pushing out DLC. Or stop updating the games to cut operating cost.
You need to look at it in a few ways. I dont' know how much diablo 3 cost to make. But diablo 2 only cost like 10 million.
Compare that to the mmorpg that cost 100+ million to make and 20-30 million addition per year.
And you are comparing a game which sold 15 million copies. I'm pretty sure path of exile wont' sale that many copies.
The expection for mmorpg, is people expect it to keep growing so developer need to spend a good amount of money to keep people playing.
For FPS, the developer just stop developing and put it to autorun and make a new updated fps.
Tsk tsk tsk. Diablo 2 costed 10 million, do account for inflation too. Diablo 3 took around 12 years to make. The developing was restarted on multiple occasions. Think again.
Very few MMOs costed 100+ million to make. For instance, Tera in all its beauty and with inflation adjustment costed ~50 mil to make. Quite a lot to go until it hits the 100 mil mark
The amount of misguided people on these boards is so high, I don't want to live on this planet anymore. You don't understand how software works. And you think you do the right thing by paying a subscription. Sure that was okay 10 years ago when it costed a little fortune to host one but today .....its nowhere near that. Especially the shit we've been fed recently.
You people don't know how software works. Compared to ANY other industry, as a developer,
- you don't pay for licenses
- you can sell billions of copies for $0. It costs you NOTHING to copy/paste a project. Software development has huge upfront cost but after that you can sit on your ass and get piles of money, just by sitting on your arse.
- you have operational costs but!
bcbully recently said that TESO made 110,000,000 out of physical copies alone. Rumor has it the game was worth 200kk to make. Given people buy a lot more digitally, lets say the game is sitting on ~300-350kk in the first 6 months
Are you seriously implying that a game cannot be run with 100 mil for a year? Do you know how 100 mil even looks like <o>
Naturally with software development you would develop a new product, as followed.
High upfront costs, create a DLC/expack, sell it to people. By gauging your active userbase, and having ~30% minimal convert rate you can calculate profits.
What modern games are doing?
1) Purchase a box with "free" time worth 1/4th of the box price (what is the box for <o>)
2) Offer subscription fee (I like to call it rental)
3) Tell your consumerist fan base how hard it is to manage a modern MMO so they can go and apologize on your behalf on the internet, defending your business model.
4) Invest money, high upfront cost, produce a new DLC/expack, which btw is cheaper to produce because you already have the engine, you have all the systems already working, so techincally you create bunch of skills, some maps and some quests. And some new character models (sometimes, not always)
5) SELL IT TO PEOPLE WHO OTHERWISE PAY A SUBSCRIPTION ALREADY (E.g. WoW, FFXIV)
On second thought ... fuck it, you guys deserve to be screwed.