Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

"Hybrid" Business Model according to Jeremy Gaffney

DarkholmeDarkholme Wolfeboro, NHPosts: 1,201Member Uncommon

One of the last questions asked towards the very end of the video;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfnpbIhY2PU

If you want to go straight to that timestamp;

http://youtu.be/VfnpbIhY2PU?t=16m

Discuss, complain, etc...

Edited for clicky link. ;)

-------------------------
"Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"

«1

Comments

  • simsalabim77simsalabim77 Somewhere, CAPosts: 627Member Uncommon
    The days of only offering P2P are over IMO. Not a surprise. 
  • YaevinduskYaevindusk Ul''dah, CAPosts: 1,544Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by simsalabim77
    The days of only offering P2P are over IMO. Not a surprise. 

     

    Agreed.

     

    The only company that may pull it off for a while is Square Enix since they'll also have their game on the PS3 with the console crowd that's been waiting for it since Final Fantasy XI.  Though the main reason that would be true is because they made the game with their own funds and don't owe any money to publishers or investors.

     

    As a whole it's about time we saw something new in terms of payment models.

    When faced with strife or discontent, the true nature of a man is brought forth. It is then when we see the character of the individual. It is then we are able to tell if he is mature enough to grin and bare it, or subject his fellow man to his complaints and woes.

  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Another nail in P2P's coffin.

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • DahkohtDahkoht Pelham, ALPosts: 290Member

    Hybrid is still far better than true F2P.

     

    Having at least some sort of up front cost to make an account means you can't make infinite throwaway accounts to spam/troll/exploit without paying something for each one.

  • TsathogguaTsathoggua San Antonio, TXPosts: 100Member

    I don't know why everyone here is so "doomsday" about a hybrid model. We know nothing of the implementation. I would speculate that there is a subscription option, but also that they'll try for a lower barrier of entry. Box price + subscription is a lot to just get into the game. 

    The ideal model for me would look like one of these:

    A) Monthly subscription that can only be purchased in 2+ month quantities. + F2P model.

    Why I like this: It provides the developers with a steady source of income, removes the initial box price, and still allows individuals to play the game free with certain restrictions.

    B) Box (+ Subscription) & F2P

    This is the most likely to happen. Devs can receive a significant amount of money upfront, as well as a steady stream from dedicated players. Leaving the Free 2 Play option open gives the game the exposure it needs.. Additionally, by making it possible to subscribe without buying a box the Devs can further develop a steady income. 

    By purchasing the box you should receive some sort of VIP status, moderately reducing the overall cost of items in the "cash shop" should one exist and providing other permanent benefits. The monthly subscription should supply a moderate amount of cash-shop currency in addition to other bonuses. 

     

    My hope is that the Devs make it possible to get everything in game, or allow the sale of cash-shop items on the auction house.

    image

  • reeereeereeereee Posts: 1,206Member Uncommon

    The only thing I want to see in the cash shop is in game currency, so it's just like playing WoW in the glory days except instead of all the cheaters buying gold from sleazy Chinese gold farmers/hackers they're buying it from the company and helping to pay for new content. 

     

    I almost hate to see even cosmetics in the cash shop simply because It seems like in f2p games the devs spend a huge amount of time making new clothes/mounts to sell in the cash shop, and why not if that's what they think drives profits.  It also means there is rarely in game ways to earn cosmetics/mounts.

     

    (Ok, maybe gender/race/appearance changes aren't that bad as well.)

  • YaevinduskYaevindusk Ul''dah, CAPosts: 1,544Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tsathoggua

    I don't know why everyone here is so "doomsday" about a hybrid model. We know nothing of the implementation. I would speculate that there is a subscription option, but also that they'll try for a lower barrier of entry. Box price + subscription is a lot to just get into the game. 

    The ideal model for me would look like one of these:

    A) Monthly subscription that can only be purchased in 2+ month quantities. + F2P model.

    Why I like this: It provides the developers with a steady source of income, removes the initial box price, and still allows individuals to play the game free with certain restrictions.

    B) Box (+ Subscription) & F2P

    This is the most likely to happen. Devs can receive a significant amount of money upfront, as well as a steady stream from dedicated players. Leaving the Free 2 Play option open gives the game the exposure it needs.. Additionally, by making it possible to subscribe without buying a box the Devs can further develop a steady income. 

    By purchasing the box you should receive some sort of VIP status, moderately reducing the overall cost of items in the "cash shop" should one exist and providing other permanent benefits. The monthly subscription should supply a moderate amount of cash-shop currency in addition to other bonuses. 

     

    My hope is that the Devs make it possible to get everything in game, or allow the sale of cash-shop items on the auction house.

     

    People were all "doomsday" about a hybrid model?  :O

    When faced with strife or discontent, the true nature of a man is brought forth. It is then when we see the character of the individual. It is then we are able to tell if he is mature enough to grin and bare it, or subject his fellow man to his complaints and woes.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,572Member Uncommon

    AAA games - F2P and B2P are the only option for a new MMORPG in this market.

    If you are a very niche indie game designed for a small dedicated playerbase, p2p could work but at low profits.

     

  • TsathogguaTsathoggua San Antonio, TXPosts: 100Member
    Originally posted by Yaevindusk
    Originally posted by Tsathoggua

    I don't know why everyone here is so "doomsday" about a hybrid model. We know nothing of the implementation. I would speculate that there is a subscription option, but also that they'll try for a lower barrier of entry. Box price + subscription is a lot to just get into the game. 

    The ideal model for me would look like one of these:

    A) Monthly subscription that can only be purchased in 2+ month quantities. + F2P model.

    Why I like this: It provides the developers with a steady source of income, removes the initial box price, and still allows individuals to play the game free with certain restrictions.

    B) Box (+ Subscription) & F2P

    This is the most likely to happen. Devs can receive a significant amount of money upfront, as well as a steady stream from dedicated players. Leaving the Free 2 Play option open gives the game the exposure it needs.. Additionally, by making it possible to subscribe without buying a box the Devs can further develop a steady income. 

    By purchasing the box you should receive some sort of VIP status, moderately reducing the overall cost of items in the "cash shop" should one exist and providing other permanent benefits. The monthly subscription should supply a moderate amount of cash-shop currency in addition to other bonuses. 

     

    My hope is that the Devs make it possible to get everything in game, or allow the sale of cash-shop items on the auction house.

     

    People were all "doomsday" about a hybrid model?  :O

    Okay, I guess just one person: Boxsnd. But I know that others will complain :P

    image

  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tsathoggua

    Okay, I guess just one person: Boxsnd. But I know that others will complain :P

    lolwut? I'm very happy this game isn't P2P. I hope the P2P model dies as soon as possible.

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • sado2020sado2020 elizabethtown, KYPosts: 112Member
    Sounds good to me as I prefer hybrid pay models.  But I would have gladly paid 15 bucks a month for this game : )

    Playing: TSW, D&D NW, Defiance (more the tv show than game >.> ) LotRO, DCUO

    image
  • AkaishenAkaishen West Jordan, UTPosts: 12Member
    I like the idea of buy to play with item mall (no pay to win). Definitely see the item mall working for the housing, hero cosmetics, and even the warplots. They could add to this a bit and implement something similar to the Rift Loyalty system. Until the new system comes out, however, I won't know if I like it or not.
  • DarkholmeDarkholme Wolfeboro, NHPosts: 1,201Member Uncommon
    Kind of surprised everyone isn't going all Chicken Little about this. Usually all I hear is "Subscription fee or GTFO!!!" Like any other business model is going to make for a bad game, bad community, etc...

    -------------------------
    "Searchers after horror haunt strange, far places..." ~ H.P.Lovecraft, "From Beyond"

  • TheHavokTheHavok San Jose, CAPosts: 2,398Member Uncommon
    I'm a bit selfish in this, due to wanting a P2P sub.  But, no matter what the model is, i'm sure I will be playing the game.  Additionally, just like with league of legends and path of exile, if the game is a fun, quality product, I have no qualms with supporting them financially (even if I don't have to).
  • SoMuchMassSoMuchMass New York, NYPosts: 548Member
    Originally posted by DMKano

    AAA games - F2P and B2P are the only option for a new MMORPG in this market.

    If you are a very niche indie game designed for a small dedicated playerbase, p2p could work but at low profits.

     

    Disagreed with this completely.  If the game is significantly better than anything in the market like WoW was when it was released people will pay a monthly sub.  If is it on par or just slightly better than MMOs in the market today people won't because there are way too many options out there today in which you can play these games for free.

     

    I don't like cash shops in games, but I don't mind a nicely implemented system like Tera has.  I can't stand Rift's F2P system or Neverwinter's payment system.  Neverwinter because you can get the best gear in the game for real life money.  Rift because you can buy anything including dungeon gear for real life money (not the best) but second best.

     

    If WildStar does what GW2 did in terms of payment model, but then actually has end game and content to keep people playing unlike GW2.  I would be surprised and it will be a huge welcome.  But then again, there are lot of limitations in terms of gameplay in GW2 due to their cash shop model.

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,572Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SoMuchMass
    Originally posted by DMKano

    AAA games - F2P and B2P are the only option for a new MMORPG in this market.

    If you are a very niche indie game designed for a small dedicated playerbase, p2p could work but at low profits.

     

    Disagreed with this completely.  If the game is significantly better than anything in the market like WoW was when it was released people will pay a monthly sub.  If is it on par or just slightly better than MMOs in the market today people won't because there are way too many options out there today in which you can play these games for free.

     SNIP....

     

    Significantly better is a lot harder to achieve in a saturated market as it is right now - so what WoW did in 2004 is a LOT more difficult to do now in 2013 (it is almost a decade later after all, the gamers are different, the market is different) and it will be even harder to do in the future. There is more competition, and vast majority of it is F2P, and we're talking well developed games with a lot of content and polish.

    A new P2P game is simply out of step with the current gamer trend, and that most players are getting used to, not to mention that F2P is a more profitable model - which is what any large MMORPG dev team will select every time. These games are not cheap to make.

     

  • itchmonitchmon west islip, NYPosts: 1,714Member Uncommon

    hybrid's fine so long as i have an option to pay a fee of RL cash and bypass silly item mall shenanigans.

     

    i like lotro and ddo and eq2; they're all hybrids.

    RIP Ribbitribbitt you are missed, kid.

    Currently Playing EVE, DFUW

    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

  • SiphaedSiphaed Everywhere!Posts: 879Member Uncommon

    Hmmm,  Hybrid = Buy2Play?   I mean, that's exactly what B2P is: a mix between the subscription game's "buy a box" and a free games "we've got stuff in shops to buy for cash".    That's what GW2, GW1, and now TSW all are.  Why shouldn't this game be like those? I'd find it very useful for both player and developer. 

     

    See, the developer/publisher see a significant investment return on the release when players = boxes sold = covers development costs.  After such, the cash shop -consisting of things like name changes, extra character slots, expanded bank slots, unique mount skins, and so on- will pay for continued development and content updates for the game.  It's win/win for both sides of the game (player and developer).


  • SoMuchMassSoMuchMass New York, NYPosts: 548Member
    Originally posted by DMKano
     

    Significantly better is a lot harder to achieve in a saturated market as it is right now - so what WoW did in 2004 is a LOT more difficult to do now in 2013 (it is almost a decade later after all, the gamers are different, the market is different) and it will be even harder to do in the future. There is more competition, and vast majority of it is F2P, and we're talking well developed games with a lot of content and polish.

    A new P2P game is simply out of step with the current gamer trend, and that most players are getting used to, not to mention that F2P is a more profitable model - which is what any large MMORPG dev team will select every time. These games are not cheap to make.

     

    I have more faith in developers than that.  I do think you can make a game that blows people away and will be significantly better.  Maybe technology is not ready for it who knows.  What makes something great is if they ahead of its time in terms of a comparison.  Would Wilt Chamberlain be as good in the NBA today as he was decades ago?  No.  But that comparison is stupid to make because what made Wilt great was that he was ahead of his competitors.  This same thing can be applied to gaming.  WoW was ahead of its time compared to its competition, it would have been successful if it was F2P or P2P.

     

    Games don't fail because of their business model.  We have seen many F2P and B2P MMOs fail.  There are recent examples like Defiance.  A great game can succeed regardless of its payment model.  Be it F2P, B2P or P2P.  I don't think the P2P model is dead, but it will be harder to justify.  We are programmed with subscriptions with everything we do in our daily lives.

     

  • DatastarDatastar Austin, TXPosts: 195Member Common
    god I hope this offers a subscription option and does not turn into a f2p cash shop money grab crapfest
  • DemalisDemalis Drumheller, ABPosts: 134Member
    Well I will get a sub if that is the option, will play regardless. But I know I won't last if it's gated cash grab... sorry, I mean cash shop.
  • GoldenArrowGoldenArrow TurkuPosts: 1,187Member Uncommon

    It's about time companies start to offer different servers for different kind of players.

    F2P servers with all the P2W bullshit cashshop.

    P2P for players who wan't to keep it balanced without microtransactions.

     

    If gaming companies actually catered their players this would already be the norm.

    Unfortunately they just want to ruin their products by forcing in F2P + P2W CS

  • DestaiDestai Detroit, MIPosts: 574Member
    Wow, I am really happy to hear this. Thus far, these guys have shown us they get it. They understand what they're getting into and this just cements my respect for them. I'd hate to see a sub-based game launch and fall short. They're at least somewhat cognizant of the current climate for pay models. 
  • DeniZgDeniZg ZagrebPosts: 668Member Uncommon

    So, what does this "hybrid model" actually mean?

    B2P + cash shop as in GW2? That doesn't sound like hybrid to me. More like the usual B2P model.

    Maybe F2P + sub as in SWTOR? That sounds hybrid, but I hope it wouldn't have such bad F2P implementation as SWTOR has.

    Is there any other hybrid model around?

  • SoMuchMassSoMuchMass New York, NYPosts: 548Member
    Originally posted by DeniZg

    So, what does this "hybrid model" actually mean?

    B2P + cash shop as in GW2? That doesn't sound like hybrid to me. More like the usual B2P model.

    Maybe F2P + sub as in SWTOR? That sounds hybrid, but I hope it wouldn't have such bad F2P implementation as SWTOR has.

    Is there any other hybrid model around?

    I am thinking it is going to be subscription + B2P.  Basically you have to buy the box.  But you have the option to subscribe for benefits.  You can play for free but you won't get those benefits.  I doubt they do it like SWTOR.  Probably more like what Tera is doing you can do anything but subscribers have some perks.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.