Originally posted by azzamasin I hope ESO launches as a F2P or B2P (although I technically consider them both the same). I'll still play if it is a Subsciption based game but I know from metrics and history that it'll never last. Subscription gaming is a dieing breed.
The thing is the MMO industry is in the middle of a transitional period. First came the flood of subscription titles that didn't have enough paying customers to share. This lasted for a while since a few titles every year were coming out, each having a surge of customers followed by a drop. With the drop F2P (with restrictions/CS) became a viable option since some money is better than nothing. F2P also sees the same surge and then drop though has introduced new players due to, well, being free. This is a good thing. Each title follows suit to now where the sub model is the monority.
Are the players satisfied? Sure, for now. With any title turning F2P there is a celebration of past and present players with the devs adding new content (usually) right away or just around the corner... because they planned it that way to garner as many paying customers as they can. What about 6 months from now? What about a year from now? When the money gets thinner due to the drop F2P shares with P2P post switch what will the developers do? What can they do? For in/out gamers this may not matter, another game will come out F2P, right? Well, the amount of AAA MMOs releasing per year has dropped to normal levels so no, the amount of AAA F2P games will steady just the same way.
What's my point? I think you will see the sub model get more popular since a smaller amount of players paying a sub surpasses that of a big net F2P model. Not for all games mind you. Either nitch games or ones that have something current F2P titles don't, either by quality or function. This is the golden age for F2P but it will settle just like everything else does.
Grats to Gameforge for picking up anouther 500k in players it just goes to show that non AAA titles can benifit form F2P now it was very intreasting that Nicholas Lovell believes the game TES when launched would prob use a P2P format but later go F2P hmm you think DEVS are finialy getting the picture when it comes to F2P and MMO gaming.
Lets hope so for the players sake.
That means nothing, and is nothing new.
I believe the number quoted by SoE was a 400% rise in concurrent players with DCUO ftp early on.
The question is, how many of those 500k made it off the starter isle? How many will be playing a month from now? How many will ever drop a cent into the game beyond that?
So you think it's any better that the game studio just let the game die? Since that's kind of where many of those game are heading.
Originally posted by azzamasin I hope ESO launches as a F2P or B2P (although I technically consider them both the same). I'll still play if it is a Subsciption based game but I know from metrics and history that it'll never last. Subscription gaming is a dieing breed.
The thing is the MMO industry is in the middle of a transitional period. First came the flood of subscription titles that didn't have enough paying customers to share. This lasted for a while since a few titles every year were coming out, each having a surge of customers followed by a drop. With the drop F2P (with restrictions/CS) became a viable option since some money is better than nothing. F2P also sees the same surge and then drop though has introduced new players due to, well, being free. This is a good thing. Each title follows suit to now where the sub model is the monority.
Are the players satisfied? Sure, for now. With any title turning F2P there is a celebration of past and present players with the devs adding new content (usually) right away or just around the corner... because they planned it that way to garner as many paying customers as they can. What about 6 months from now? What about a year from now? When the money gets thinner due to the drop F2P shares with P2P post switch what will the developers do? What can they do? For in/out gamers this may not matter, another game will come out F2P, right? Well, the amount of AAA MMOs releasing per year has dropped to normal levels so no, the amount of AAA F2P games will steady just the same way.
What's my point? I think you will see the sub model get more popular since a smaller amount of players paying a sub surpasses that of a big net F2P model. Not for all games mind you. Either nitch games or ones that have something current F2P titles don't, either by quality or function. This is the golden age for F2P but it will settle just like everything else does.
Ok I'll ask you a question. You know those P2P mmo turning F2P... you really think they are f2p? as far as I can see they are hybrid model.
The only thing they are gambling is those people that are having a sub right now "dont" become a freebie. That's it. I mean they saw their sub declining and one thing you know about mmorpg players is once they are gone they usually don't come back. So what they do is try to keep the sub alive but try to get more players so the game dont' die and maybe make more money on the way.
I'm not going to tell you f2p model is better. What I'm going to tell you is I believe the financial department for "all those game studio that turned f2p" more than I believe you. If they turned into f2p, that must be because they believe that model will generate more profit "for them". Those games have a hard time hanging in with their subscriber anyway.
Obviously there are also many p2p games on the market. And I strongly believe the financial department more than I believe any random forum poster telling me f2p model works better for "that game". There are obvious a market for both. And the game studio are doing what they think is best.
I'll make it simple, why should I pay for a sub for "whatever game" when I can play another game which is better for free? It depend on the game right?
Originally posted by Rthuth434 every F2P conversion has an initial boom like this. hopefully the huge dropoff next month will be just as widely reported.
Good point. The drop off usually wont be posted until quarterly report comes in.
Grats to Gameforge for picking up anouther 500k in players it just goes to show that non AAA titles can benifit form F2P now it was very intreasting that Nicholas Lovell believes the game TES when launched would prob use a P2P format but later go F2P hmm you think DEVS are finialy getting the picture when it comes to F2P and MMO gaming.
Lets hope so for the players sake.
That means nothing, and is nothing new.
I believe the number quoted by SoE was a 400% rise in concurrent players with DCUO ftp early on.
The question is, how many of those 500k made it off the starter isle? How many will be playing a month from now? How many will ever drop a cent into the game beyond that?
So you think it's any better that the game studio just let the game die? Since that's kind of where many of those game are heading.
I don't think there has ever been a case of F2p resulting in less people. The big surge doesnt say anything about F2P. In fact, it makes further sense for TERA to do well because it has a very strong appeal to the age group that might not have a credit card yet.
Originally posted by azzamasin I hope ESO launches as a F2P or B2P (although I technically consider them both the same). I'll still play if it is a Subsciption based game but I know from metrics and history that it'll never last. Subscription gaming is a dieing breed.
The thing is the MMO industry is in the middle of a transitional period. First came the flood of subscription titles that didn't have enough paying customers to share. This lasted for a while since a few titles every year were coming out, each having a surge of customers followed by a drop. With the drop F2P (with restrictions/CS) became a viable option since some money is better than nothing. F2P also sees the same surge and then drop though has introduced new players due to, well, being free. This is a good thing. Each title follows suit to now where the sub model is the monority.
Are the players satisfied? Sure, for now. With any title turning F2P there is a celebration of past and present players with the devs adding new content (usually) right away or just around the corner... because they planned it that way to garner as many paying customers as they can. What about 6 months from now? What about a year from now? When the money gets thinner due to the drop F2P shares with P2P post switch what will the developers do? What can they do? For in/out gamers this may not matter, another game will come out F2P, right? Well, the amount of AAA MMOs releasing per year has dropped to normal levels so no, the amount of AAA F2P games will steady just the same way.
What's my point? I think you will see the sub model get more popular since a smaller amount of players paying a sub surpasses that of a big net F2P model. Not for all games mind you. Either nitch games or ones that have something current F2P titles don't, either by quality or function. This is the golden age for F2P but it will settle just like everything else does.
Ok I'll ask you a question. You know those P2P mmo turning F2P... you really think they are f2p? as far as I can see they are hybrid model.
The only thing they are gambling is those people that are having a sub right now "dont" become a freebie. That's it. I mean they saw their sub declining and one thing you know about mmorpg players is once they are gone they usually don't come back. So what they do is try to keep the sub alive but try to get more players so the game dont' die and maybe make more money on the way.
I'm not going to tell you f2p model is better. What I'm going to tell you is I believe the financial department for "all those game studio that turned f2p" more than I believe you. If they turned into f2p, that must be because they believe that model will generate more profit "for them". Those games have a hard time hanging in with their subscriber anyway.
Obviously there are also many p2p games on the market. And I strongly believe the financial department more than I believe any random forum poster telling me f2p model works better for "that game". There are obvious a market for both. And the game studio are doing what they think is best.
I'll make it simple, why should I pay for a sub for "whatever game" when I can play another game which is better for free? It depend on the game right?
Of course companies are going to make decisions based upon keeping the lights on and as many customers as they can. This includes "restructuring" along with the F2P conversion and making sure that cost is less than income. It's pretty simple to see that a company making more money will be in a position to do more development to their game. F2P is a great way for a company to get a little more than they would otherwise and for players to experience a game without paying or paying what they want. However, as goes with any business you get what you pay for.
It does come down to the specific game and really each individual person and their preference. We speak here in more general terms because we don't know the thoughts of every player. If you can find a game that you can play for free that surpasses that of a sub based one more power to you, that's great. I have also spent time playing F2P games and like how I don't have to commit. In the end I prefer something I pay for. Not because spending money garners an attachment but because I see now where the priceline is. I like having all of the game up front, not being reminded every turn I could spend money and seeing regular updates.
Looking at the Western MMO market, the lion's share of revenue is owned by WoW, GW2 (B2P), EVE, Rift, et al.
The leading FTP MMOs, Terra, Aion, SWTOR, LOTRO, STO, and AOC all began as P2P and only switched to F2P after severe underperformance.
All console gaming is B2P.
The Zynga social media games are faltering.
In fact, the only real FTP success story is LOL, which comparatively, had a very small initial development budget.
Granted, cash shops, B2P, and DLC are becoming more prevalent, but no developer has yet to come up with a way in which F2P covers the enormous development costs for an MMO.
TESO might have some sort of hybrid model, but it surely will not be F2P. You can't count on 5% of your game's population to subzidize the other 95%, or not turn the game into a P2W yawnfest without either a subscription or regular releases of DLC.
Grats to Gameforge for picking up anouther 500k in players it just goes to show that non AAA titles can benifit form F2P now it was very intreasting that Nicholas Lovell believes the game TES when launched would prob use a P2P format but later go F2P hmm you think DEVS are finialy getting the picture when it comes to F2P and MMO gaming.
Lets hope so for the players sake.
That means nothing, and is nothing new.
I believe the number quoted by SoE was a 400% rise in concurrent players with DCUO ftp early on.
The question is, how many of those 500k made it off the starter isle? How many will be playing a month from now? How many will ever drop a cent into the game beyond that?
So you think it's any better that the game studio just let the game die? Since that's kind of where many of those game are heading.
I don't think there has ever been a case of F2p resulting in less people. The big surge doesnt say anything about F2P. In fact, it makes further sense for TERA to do well because it has a very strong appeal to the age group that might not have a credit card yet.
So TERA should be worrying about the freebies because they cost more bandwith?
I dont' think those game studio are worried there are freebies. I think what they are worrying is the game is dying. Aka mass exodus which make more people leave.
The truth is you know those games are going downhill. There are just way too many games on the market. I think someone mentioned there is like 5 new mmorpg out every month? Actually I think that's more like 10 every month global if you count the asian market too. THey might as well cash in when they can.
Looking at the Western MMO market, the lion's share of revenue is owned by WoW, GW2 (B2P), EVE, Rift, et al.
The leading FTP MMOs, Terra, Aion, SWTOR, LOTRO, STO, and AOC all began as P2P and only switched to F2P after severe underperformance.
All console gaming is B2P.
The Zynga social media games are faltering.
In fact, the only real FTP success story is LOL, which comparatively, had a very small initial development budget.
Granted, cash shops, B2P, and DLC are becoming more prevalent, but no developer has yet to come up with a way in which F2P covers the enormous development costs for an MMO.
TESO might have some sort of hybrid model, but it surely will not be F2P. You can't count on 5% of your game's population to subzidize the other 95%, or not turn the game into a P2W yawnfest without either a subscription or regular releases of DLC.
That is kind of a weird comment because those FTP games you list are hybrid model too.
And it is kind of funny calling GW2 B2P, when it is no difference than other p2p games which sell their box and turning them to f2p after. I always find GW2 cahshop similar to other f2p cashshop games. The only different is in GW2 those pay 2 win items are changed into rediculously expensive skins. Basically in GW2 and many others there is some sort of gem system where you can trade in for gold. And all of them try to make enormous amount of gold sink so people will be tempted to buy those and trade for cash.
The truth is all 3 model works. Just some work better for that specific games and market. Maybe that's why GW2 work exceptionaly well. Since they differentiate themself from the rest of the market.
Problem with f2p titles is some of them are pretty much pay2win, what I mean by this is the game is setup in a way that past a certan point (usually 25-30% into the game) you have to start heavily investing in the cash shop if you wanna advance at any decent pace, or in some games even at all (aeriagames starlight story is a prime example) , Most f2p titles with pvp are especally like this because they know people will pay for any advantage they can get. Games like Tera are rare in the f2p world where its not pay2win, but its an exception to the norm. Then again Tera is not a true f2p, a psp game that has gone f2p is not a real f2p title. A real f2p title was setup to be that way from the start.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Runescapes 200million users equated to 50 million in revenue for the year which equals about 4 dollars a player. Of course not a month, thats 4 dollars a year from each player.
How many subs do you need to hit 50mil? Around 278k subs. EvE, an indie in the begining, has more than that.
What that means is Runescape needed over 600 times as many players to make the same amount of money...
Keep in mind that Runescape is and has been viewed as one of the top grossing free to play games out there (Notice I did not say THE top grossing free to play there are some that gross higher but also have a much larger player base).
Runescape does not have 200 million active accounts. An active account is anyone that's logged in, in the last 30 days. It may have 200 million accounts going back to when dinosaurs roamed the earth but that doesn't mean anything in a f2p game.
Runescapes 200million users equated to 50 million in revenue for the year which equals about 4 dollars a player. Of course not a month, thats 4 dollars a year from each player.
How many subs do you need to hit 50mil? Around 278k subs. EvE, an indie in the begining, has more than that.
What that means is Runescape needed over 600 times as many players to make the same amount of money...
Keep in mind that Runescape is and has been viewed as one of the top grossing free to play games out there (Notice I did not say THE top grossing free to play there are some that gross higher but also have a much larger player base).
Runescape does not have 200 million active accounts. An active account is anyone that's logged in, in the last 30 days. It may have 200 million accounts going back to when dinosaurs roamed the earth but that doesn't mean anything in a f2p game.
I'm not saying you're wrong but where is the term "active account" defined and shared between companies? 30 days seems to make the most sense but who keeps track?
Looking at the Western MMO market, the lion's share of revenue is owned by WoW, GW2 (B2P), EVE, Rift, et al.
The leading FTP MMOs, Terra, Aion, SWTOR, LOTRO, STO, and AOC all began as P2P and only switched to F2P after severe underperformance.
All console gaming is B2P.
The Zynga social media games are faltering.
In fact, the only real FTP success story is LOL, which comparatively, had a very small initial development budget.
Granted, cash shops, B2P, and DLC are becoming more prevalent, but no developer has yet to come up with a way in which F2P covers the enormous development costs for an MMO.
TESO might have some sort of hybrid model, but it surely will not be F2P. You can't count on 5% of your game's population to subzidize the other 95%, or not turn the game into a P2W yawnfest without either a subscription or regular releases of DLC.
That is kind of a weird comment because those FTP games you list are hybrid model too.
And it is kind of funny calling GW2 B2P, when it is no difference than other p2p games which sell their box and turning them to f2p after. I always find GW2 cahshop similar to other f2p cashshop games. The only different is in GW2 those pay 2 win items are changed into rediculously expensive skins. Basically in GW2 and many others there is some sort of gem system where you can trade in for gold. And all of them try to make enormous amount of gold sink so people will be tempted to buy those and trade for cash.
The truth is all 3 model works. Just some work better for that specific games and market. Maybe that's why GW2 work exceptionaly well. Since they differentiate themself from the rest of the market.
Not being argumentative, but that is my point.
B2P is not F2P, it relies on inital box sales to be economically viable.
As you pointed out, even the Freemium games haven't abandoned subscriptions entirely, it is too big a component to ignore.
There never has, and I speculate there never will be in the near future, a Western MMO that is launched as FTP, including TESO.
Grats to Gameforge for picking up anouther 500k in players it just goes to show that non AAA titles can benifit form F2P now it was very intreasting that Nicholas Lovell believes the game TES when launched would prob use a P2P format but later go F2P hmm you think DEVS are finialy getting the picture when it comes to F2P and MMO gaming.
Lets hope so for the players sake.
That means nothing, and is nothing new.
I believe the number quoted by SoE was a 400% rise in concurrent players with DCUO ftp early on.
The question is, how many of those 500k made it off the starter isle? How many will be playing a month from now? How many will ever drop a cent into the game beyond that?
So you think it's any better that the game studio just let the game die? Since that's kind of where many of those game are heading.
Some of them probably should have. Some of them are likely to die anyway, and going F2P is just delaying the inevitable. Hell, there's probably a few that never should have been made in the first place.
There are others, though, that are right for F2P. And there might even be one or two right on the borders, that could have made it as P2P if the presence of F2P wasn't there saying 'just wait... you'll get in free later" to a certain crowd.
B2P is not F2P, it relies on inital box sales to be economically viable.
As you pointed out, even the Freemium games haven't abandoned subscriptions entirely, it is too big a component to ignore.
There never has, and I speculate there never will be in the near future, a Western MMO that is launched as FTP, including TESO.
Thing is, if there's a remote chance P2P will work for the game... there's no reason not to at least try at first. It's far easier to go F2P if P2P fails, than it is to jump 'up' to P2P if you start out F2P.
All data points of F2P gaining on P2P, and there are way more F2P players than P2P. So the writing is prettymuch on the wall.
Ha, ha, ... you made me laugh. And this looks strange to you there are more customers that want to eat in restaurant for free then paying? :-)
As for me, .... f2p is killing good quality gaming. Period. Only acceptable way besides P2P for me that allows to keep quality is maybe B2P, but so far only Gw2 is great in this area.
Comments
The thing is the MMO industry is in the middle of a transitional period. First came the flood of subscription titles that didn't have enough paying customers to share. This lasted for a while since a few titles every year were coming out, each having a surge of customers followed by a drop. With the drop F2P (with restrictions/CS) became a viable option since some money is better than nothing. F2P also sees the same surge and then drop though has introduced new players due to, well, being free. This is a good thing. Each title follows suit to now where the sub model is the monority.
Are the players satisfied? Sure, for now. With any title turning F2P there is a celebration of past and present players with the devs adding new content (usually) right away or just around the corner... because they planned it that way to garner as many paying customers as they can. What about 6 months from now? What about a year from now? When the money gets thinner due to the drop F2P shares with P2P post switch what will the developers do? What can they do? For in/out gamers this may not matter, another game will come out F2P, right? Well, the amount of AAA MMOs releasing per year has dropped to normal levels so no, the amount of AAA F2P games will steady just the same way.
What's my point? I think you will see the sub model get more popular since a smaller amount of players paying a sub surpasses that of a big net F2P model. Not for all games mind you. Either nitch games or ones that have something current F2P titles don't, either by quality or function. This is the golden age for F2P but it will settle just like everything else does.
So you think it's any better that the game studio just let the game die? Since that's kind of where many of those game are heading.
Ok I'll ask you a question. You know those P2P mmo turning F2P... you really think they are f2p? as far as I can see they are hybrid model.
The only thing they are gambling is those people that are having a sub right now "dont" become a freebie. That's it. I mean they saw their sub declining and one thing you know about mmorpg players is once they are gone they usually don't come back. So what they do is try to keep the sub alive but try to get more players so the game dont' die and maybe make more money on the way.
I'm not going to tell you f2p model is better. What I'm going to tell you is I believe the financial department for "all those game studio that turned f2p" more than I believe you. If they turned into f2p, that must be because they believe that model will generate more profit "for them". Those games have a hard time hanging in with their subscriber anyway.
Obviously there are also many p2p games on the market. And I strongly believe the financial department more than I believe any random forum poster telling me f2p model works better for "that game". There are obvious a market for both. And the game studio are doing what they think is best.
I'll make it simple, why should I pay for a sub for "whatever game" when I can play another game which is better for free? It depend on the game right?
Good point. The drop off usually wont be posted until quarterly report comes in.
I don't think there has ever been a case of F2p resulting in less people. The big surge doesnt say anything about F2P. In fact, it makes further sense for TERA to do well because it has a very strong appeal to the age group that might not have a credit card yet.
Of course companies are going to make decisions based upon keeping the lights on and as many customers as they can. This includes "restructuring" along with the F2P conversion and making sure that cost is less than income. It's pretty simple to see that a company making more money will be in a position to do more development to their game. F2P is a great way for a company to get a little more than they would otherwise and for players to experience a game without paying or paying what they want. However, as goes with any business you get what you pay for.
It does come down to the specific game and really each individual person and their preference. We speak here in more general terms because we don't know the thoughts of every player. If you can find a game that you can play for free that surpasses that of a sub based one more power to you, that's great. I have also spent time playing F2P games and like how I don't have to commit. In the end I prefer something I pay for. Not because spending money garners an attachment but because I see now where the priceline is. I like having all of the game up front, not being reminded every turn I could spend money and seeing regular updates.
F2P is still just a marketing term. Vapourware.
Looking at the Western MMO market, the lion's share of revenue is owned by WoW, GW2 (B2P), EVE, Rift, et al.
The leading FTP MMOs, Terra, Aion, SWTOR, LOTRO, STO, and AOC all began as P2P and only switched to F2P after severe underperformance.
All console gaming is B2P.
The Zynga social media games are faltering.
In fact, the only real FTP success story is LOL, which comparatively, had a very small initial development budget.
Granted, cash shops, B2P, and DLC are becoming more prevalent, but no developer has yet to come up with a way in which F2P covers the enormous development costs for an MMO.
TESO might have some sort of hybrid model, but it surely will not be F2P. You can't count on 5% of your game's population to subzidize the other 95%, or not turn the game into a P2W yawnfest without either a subscription or regular releases of DLC.
So TERA should be worrying about the freebies because they cost more bandwith?
I dont' think those game studio are worried there are freebies. I think what they are worrying is the game is dying. Aka mass exodus which make more people leave.
The truth is you know those games are going downhill. There are just way too many games on the market. I think someone mentioned there is like 5 new mmorpg out every month? Actually I think that's more like 10 every month global if you count the asian market too. THey might as well cash in when they can.
That is kind of a weird comment because those FTP games you list are hybrid model too.
And it is kind of funny calling GW2 B2P, when it is no difference than other p2p games which sell their box and turning them to f2p after. I always find GW2 cahshop similar to other f2p cashshop games. The only different is in GW2 those pay 2 win items are changed into rediculously expensive skins. Basically in GW2 and many others there is some sort of gem system where you can trade in for gold. And all of them try to make enormous amount of gold sink so people will be tempted to buy those and trade for cash.
The truth is all 3 model works. Just some work better for that specific games and market. Maybe that's why GW2 work exceptionaly well. Since they differentiate themself from the rest of the market.
Being a pessimist is a win-win pattern of thinking. If you're a pessimist (I'll admit that I am!) you're either:
A. Proven right (if something bad happens)
or
B. Pleasantly surprised (if something good happens)
Either way, you can't lose! Try it out sometime!
Runescape does not have 200 million active accounts. An active account is anyone that's logged in, in the last 30 days. It may have 200 million accounts going back to when dinosaurs roamed the earth but that doesn't mean anything in a f2p game.
I'm not saying you're wrong but where is the term "active account" defined and shared between companies? 30 days seems to make the most sense but who keeps track?
Not being argumentative, but that is my point.
B2P is not F2P, it relies on inital box sales to be economically viable.
As you pointed out, even the Freemium games haven't abandoned subscriptions entirely, it is too big a component to ignore.
There never has, and I speculate there never will be in the near future, a Western MMO that is launched as FTP, including TESO.
Some of them probably should have. Some of them are likely to die anyway, and going F2P is just delaying the inevitable. Hell, there's probably a few that never should have been made in the first place.
There are others, though, that are right for F2P. And there might even be one or two right on the borders, that could have made it as P2P if the presence of F2P wasn't there saying 'just wait... you'll get in free later" to a certain crowd.
Thing is, if there's a remote chance P2P will work for the game... there's no reason not to at least try at first. It's far easier to go F2P if P2P fails, than it is to jump 'up' to P2P if you start out F2P.
Ha, ha, ... you made me laugh. And this looks strange to you there are more customers that want to eat in restaurant for free then paying? :-)
As for me, .... f2p is killing good quality gaming. Period. Only acceptable way besides P2P for me that allows to keep quality is maybe B2P, but so far only Gw2 is great in this area.