I can pretty much bet it will be Buy To Play with a cash shop and a Freemium model a la EQ2.
If they sell it for 50 - 100 bucks (Regular/collectors) people will shell out the money for it.
IF they charge a sub, people will pay for it
if they have an item shop with a Unicorn with flaming hoofs, people will pay for it
They are a business with investors when it comes down to it. If it goes 100% Free to pay (no box purchase) then i would be surprised. Either way I am jumping on it.
EQN has already been confirmed to be free to play. F2P is the future SOE says.
F2P as in, download the game day 1 from the internet and you're good to go.
I can pretty much bet it will be Buy To Play with a cash shop and a Freemium model a la EQ2.
If they sell it for 50 - 100 bucks (Regular/collectors) people will shell out the money for it.
IF they charge a sub, people will pay for it
if they have an item shop with a Unicorn with flaming hoofs, people will pay for it
They are a business with investors when it comes down to it. If it goes 100% Free to pay (no box purchase) then i would be surprised. Either way I am jumping on it.
EQN has already been confirmed to be free to play. F2P is the future SOE says.
F2P as in, download the game day 1 from the internet and you're good to go.
This indeed is correct, though EQ2 is free to play; however you have to buy the expansions if you want to play the new content and utilize the "gold membership;s 15/month" to use the top tier gear. It is a sneaky free to play... just enough to give you a taste and make you want to throw a bit of cash at it. But who knows until 8/2
Originally posted by Darkarai79 idk about you but id rather not waste 60-70$ on a game that might or might not suck. Reading reviews doesn't do it for me either, people will always have opinions so now that F2P has come around im glad i get to try something before hand, you wouldn't buy a box at a restaurant and trust the waiter's opinion saying its amazing deal! lol you might get some crap on a stick and your down 60$....
Yea, except now you get 1 bite of steak to decide if you like it or not. If you like it you have to pay 20$ for each new bite of steak, which costs you more than if you just spent 60$ on it in the first place
true lol but ive never spent money on a f2p game EVER... somehow i still find the way to keep up with subbed players because the devs forget to check every little bit of their game to make sure your restrcited.
as long as i can still sub and get the full version of the game without having to buy all this BS at the store then i am good.
people that want to play a gimped free version of the game can do it, i just don't see how they put up with that crap unless they have no other choice.
So called "F2P" is an invitation to botters, cheaters, and gold sellers. The game will get over run with scumbag players of every type that can not be gotten rid of. Has SOE learned nothing from PS2? Apparently not. That game was loaded with hackers from beta and the vast majority were never removed, or simply returned on another acct after being banned/suspended. To me "F2P" is a huge turn off and is just another way of saying "not worth paying for".
My biggest fear and one of the main reason I dislike F2P is that it encourages companies to start charging for everything.
Well maybe not charging for everything. But it encourages them to limit things in game so that you have to buy it instead.
"Want more storage space, well we (the devs) were going to give you 40 slot backpack and a 100 slot bank, but we decided to give you a 20 backpack and you can spend 2.99 per 10 slots added. And your bank tab, you can have 50 slots and then buy extra slots at 1.99 per 10. And if you want an extra bank tab its 9.99 but each 10 row is only .99 for the second and third tabs."
"Want a riding mount, no problem. You can get one without using RL money (or currency that can only be purchased with RL money), but it only increases speed by 25%. want to got 50% faster than run speed well thats only 2.99. Want to got 100% well its only another 2.99 after you purchase the 50% boost."
This is what has always worried me about F2P games. And they will do it, because they have to have a source of income. And then there is the problem of what happens when the people have bought all the convience purchaces? They'll have to come up with more expensive ones, or start charging for every little thing.
My main question when people bring up the cash shops is "What's the difference between $60 for the box +$15 a month.... and spending $15 - $20 a month on a f2P MMO cash shop?
At least with F2P you can...
1. Try it before you buy it.
2. Buy the cash shop items that mean the most to your experience.
I've found that I spend about the same amount of money in F2P games I enjoy as I did with original subscriptions.
So I don't mind either model. I've come to prefer F2P, since I don't enjoy every single MMORPG and being able to try it first at any time in it's lifespan is a real money saver.
Originally posted by Burntvet So called "F2P" is an invitation to botters, cheaters, and gold sellers. The game will get over run with scumbag players of every type that can not be gotten rid of. Has SOE learned nothing from PS2? Apparently not. That game was loaded with hackers from beta and the vast majority were never removed, or simply returned on another acct after being banned/suspended. To me "F2P" is a huge turn off and is just another way of saying "not worth paying for".
Having a crappy game architecture leads to cheating in games (IE: if you don't have all your operations server side people will find a way to cheat, really game design 101 here).
Botters and gold sellers exist due to demand, not due to game payment models, if you believe otherwise there are a few hundred chinese political prisoners, that are known of of course, who'll tell you just how painful sitting in front of a computer for 18 hours a day to farm gold in World of Warcraft to meet a quota is (and yes if they didn't meet their quota they would get beaten).
For me, F2P indicates that the game may not be as awesome as some major MMO sites try to sell.
Why?
Because based on some analysis they made, they most likely came to a conclusion that there would not be sufficient demand for their product with an actual price tag (e.g. 15 USD / month) for the P2P revenues to exceed potential F2P revenues.
If they really thought that they have a product which will be played by millions of players then they would go with P2P as in such case it would be more profitable than F2P.
Basically for me it means that the game is not as ambitious as Smedley pushes on his twitter.
Free-to-play MMO games take 47% of all money spent on MMO games in the US, up from 39% in 2010
The total US F2P MMO market has grown from $1.0bn to $1.2bn: +24%
Free-to-play MMO games gross more revenues than Pay-to-play MMOs in Asian (51%), European (53%) and Emerging markets (59%)
Personally I prefer B2P, but SoE is a big fan of F2P now so that is the most likely result.
I think The Secret World has handled B2P well, but I am not a fan of how GW2 has handled it. TSW gives nice chunks of content for a small fee, while GW2 gives it for free, but its all temporary and linked heavily to the cash shop. It just feels too pressured, while with TSW you can buy that content at any time and enjoy it for as long as you like.
F2P is hit and miss. While I don't mind the convenience aspect (faster levelling or skill gain for paying customers), when you deliberately turn the game into a RNG nightmare or massive grind (Neverwinter) to get the items without paying, it just loses its appeal. Or gating off content behind constant temporary ticketing (SWTOR and AoC). I think the best F2P models have been Aion and TERA, where it is purely cosmetic / convenience. Rift is fine, but the purchasing real gear aspect is a bit of a let down.
For me, F2P indicates that the game may not be as awesome as some major MMO sites try to sell.
Why?
Because based on some analysis they made, they most likely came to a conclusion that there would not be sufficient demand for their product with an actual price tag (e.g. 15 USD / month) for the P2P revenues to exceed potential F2P revenues.
If they really thought that they have a product which will be played by millions of players then they would go with P2P as in such case it would be more profitable than F2P.
Basically for me it means that the game is not as ambitious as Smedley pushes on his twitter.
You're an idiot if you think that SoE isn't putting everything they've got into EQN. EQ is their flagship product and the game that gave them their name. It's the one game they have that truly matters, every other FTP piece of crap they have released is just that a FTP POS.
They know that this is their big ticket item and the only hope they will have for the next 10 years to stay relevant (or take the lead) in the MMO market. You're assumption is based off of the games that have been released as FTP over the last couple years. Name me one AAA MMO (aside from PS2 but come on who counts that shit) that has been released as a FTP game. I can't think of one.
SoE is really the first of the big companies (blizz,trion,ect,ect,) to make a HUGE AAA title and release it as FTP right off the bat. SoE believes in the FTP model because it works, and it works well if implemented right...
All that said I really don't have much of any faith in SoE. With their track record it will be a PoS but as a original 1999 EQ player I hope to god they pull off a miracle.
For me, F2P indicates that the game may not be as awesome as some major MMO sites try to sell.
Why?
Because based on some analysis they made, they most likely came to a conclusion that there would not be sufficient demand for their product with an actual price tag (e.g. 15 USD / month) for the P2P revenues to exceed potential F2P revenues.
If they really thought that they have a product which will be played by millions of players then they would go with P2P as in such case it would be more profitable than F2P.
Basically for me it means that the game is not as ambitious as Smedley pushes on his twitter.
It's a sales trick, is basically what we're trying to tell you.
F2P works like advertising on crack (it brings in more players), more players makes game feel more alive for the players in it and it breeds more players. Then you got a lot of people who actually pay more than $15 a month on the cash shop.
So in the end, it brings in more customers and the spending customers tend to spend the same/more money.
As shown by another person on this thread with his links to marketing statistics, F2P is just the superior model.
The days where F2P equated to low budget or substandard quality are long past. F2P is the new industry standard in AAA products, despite what F2P brings to mind in your head.
Another thing is the the fact that $15 subs are restrictive. Many people don't have time to play the game for a month or two and see that they just "lost $15 -$30". Which weights on people as a negative (Spent money and got nothing from it).
With free2play, you can take a break and return hassle free. When you spend money you get something tangible for your cash.
It's the difference between paying $15 to get into a mall, and paying $15 to buy something in the mall. The latter is psychologically more appealing to many people. I personally didn't mind $15 a month, and $60 for the box, but F2P is a superior business model and has zero indication on the quality of the product.
There have been plenty of terrible pay to play games, there have been many good F2P games.
Originally posted by Burntvet So called "F2P" is an invitation to botters, cheaters, and gold sellers. The game will get over run with scumbag players of every type that can not be gotten rid of. Has SOE learned nothing from PS2? Apparently not. That game was loaded with hackers from beta and the vast majority were never removed, or simply returned on another acct after being banned/suspended. To me "F2P" is a huge turn off and is just another way of saying "not worth paying for".
Having a crappy game architecture leads to cheating in games (IE: if you don't have all your operations server side people will find a way to cheat, really game design 101 here).
Botters and gold sellers exist due to demand, not due to game payment models, if you believe otherwise there are a few hundred chinese political prisoners, that are known of of course, who'll tell you just how painful sitting in front of a computer for 18 hours a day to farm gold in World of Warcraft to meet a quota is (and yes if they didn't meet their quota they would get beaten).
There has been a single game to my knowledge that had all operations server side: Final Fantasy XIV. I would tell you to go see how that turned out, but they scrapped it.
Originally posted by Burntvet So called "F2P" is an invitation to botters, cheaters, and gold sellers. The game will get over run with scumbag players of every type that can not be gotten rid of. Has SOE learned nothing from PS2? Apparently not. That game was loaded with hackers from beta and the vast majority were never removed, or simply returned on another acct after being banned/suspended. To me "F2P" is a huge turn off and is just another way of saying "not worth paying for".
Having a crappy game architecture leads to cheating in games (IE: if you don't have all your operations server side people will find a way to cheat, really game design 101 here).
Botters and gold sellers exist due to demand, not due to game payment models, if you believe otherwise there are a few hundred chinese political prisoners, that are known of of course, who'll tell you just how painful sitting in front of a computer for 18 hours a day to farm gold in World of Warcraft to meet a quota is (and yes if they didn't meet their quota they would get beaten).
There has been a single game to my knowledge that had all operations server side: Final Fantasy XIV. I would tell you to go see how that turned out, but they scrapped it.
Try again lad, any game that doesn't have a gameguard (or similar anti-hack/anti-cheat) system has most critical functions on the server. I was not referring to actually rendering the game or such, merely to all the operations regarding the outcomes of your actions in-game.
I would like to see SOE attempt "innovation" in regards to the payment model as well as all the other new things they are bringing to the table.
It can't be argued that there are plenty of people on all three sides of this issue, preferring Sub, B2P, and F2P.
I would like to see SOE cater to all of us personally, with separate servers for all three, I know it might take a bit more time, to release, but it would put some of this bickering about whats better to rest, and everyone could have the payment model with the benefits they feel that model brings to them.
Personally, I prefer sub based games. I feel the community is more invested in the game, it can keep the gold spammers from overrunning the chat, It saves me from having to play with every person that wants to wear their ass for a hat because they think its amusing ( at least to them) and then just make a new account, when people start to blackball them, and I also feel it leads people to feeling more entitled to try and push boundaries with their toons, because they pay for their time, so not as much need to conform to min/max ideas.
Just my opinions, perfect for me, probably not so much for you
I hope they go with a GW2 buying and cash shop style instead of fully free to play with retarded cash shop items and prices.
I think GW2 has the perfect middle road, or perhaps the Eve Online subscription method, but that requires a full scale player build market and thats unique to Eve Online and it would require subs in the market to buy with ingame currency. This might be very complicated to build inside a mmo as it needs to be fully player driven.
The easiest way is just o copy GW2 payment method i think ? Anyway free to play is not realy my thing :P
Well if Guildwars 2 or Secret World both show, B2P doesn't really do all that much except add a cash price to pay for the game before jumping in and paying more from the in game cash shop (Yes, stop denying the games don't have one cause they are there to milk you AFTER you buy). A B2P model honestly would just milk the consumer quicker, particularly those who buy it only to find they don't like it. While I'm sure B2P can do things if its done in a less greedy way, but just the set up of it all with the recent examples shows that its more likely they will try and capitalize on it further to generate increased funding while yes, its good for the company but for the consumer, raking in cash from those who buy and end up quitting since it isn't that great or isn't for them, and taking more for the dedicated who then buy from the cash shop on top of what they paid for the game.
Originally posted by Iceman8235 I think F2P will work fine for EQ next. It'll help keep the servers full longer. Having a stable income, if I enjoy the game I'll most likely sub to it if there are time saving bonuses involved in subbing.
F2p does not provide stable income. It provides a quick in rush and then in 2 months the income is gone. That's what the devs want not what the players want.
SoE clearly disagrees with you. Maybe you should alert them, and tell them that their numbers are wrong and to switch back to their old business model.
Also, League of Legends (AKA money machine) disagrees. =p
There are many examples of F2P being a huge success.
Did you just compare LoL to a MMO?
He is right tho, F2P MMOs do not generate stable income over years. Its a quick way to make some money, and that is exactly the problem.
That's why we keeping getting crappy MMos, one after another.....
Originally posted by burdock2 I myself would be happy to pay a subscription. Are people happy that it will be free to play or is that casting a pall on the shiny new game? What would you consider to be SOEs best "Free to play"model out of thier current stable of games?
To answer your question..................none
All their F2P models are crap....................SoE need to look at Rift model.
SOE's Player Studio program invites players to download sample geometry files for actual in-game objects and through the use of standard third party art tools, learn how to develop, design and personalize items of their own – from re-coloring and re-texturing, to reshaping an item's geometry. Once complete, players are encouraged to name and create a description for their item, describe how the item will fit into the prospective game’s ongoing narrative storyline, and submit it to SOE for review and possible inclusion in the SOE Marketplace. If a player-created item is selected for inclusion in the SOE Marketplace, SOE will share 40% of the net amount it receives from the sale of the item with the player that created the item.
Originally posted by Iceman8235 I think F2P will work fine for EQ next. It'll help keep the servers full longer. Having a stable income, if I enjoy the game I'll most likely sub to it if there are time saving bonuses involved in subbing.
F2p does not provide stable income. It provides a quick in rush and then in 2 months the income is gone. That's what the devs want not what the players want.
SoE clearly disagrees with you. Maybe you should alert them, and tell them that their numbers are wrong and to switch back to their old business model.
Also, League of Legends (AKA money machine) disagrees. =p
There are many examples of F2P being a huge success.
Did you just compare LoL to a MMO?
He is right tho, F2P MMOs do not generate stable income over years. Its a quick way to make some money, and that is exactly the problem.
That's why we keeping getting crappy MMos, one after another.....
It's quite amazing that some of you feel like you know better than businesses. As though you have their numbers. SOE has been around the block a time or two with MMOs, if F2P wasn't making them money, why on earth would they switch ALL of their games to F2P? It's not rocket science, SOE is making more money now.
SOE has stated numerous times that they are making more money now than they ever did before they went F2P.
I didn't compare LoL to an MMO. He said F2P doesn't make money long term, it most certainly does. "F2P provides a quick rush and then 2 months the income is gone." lol That quote is laughable, at best.
Originally posted by burdock2 I myself would be happy to pay a subscription. Are people happy that it will be free to play or is that casting a pall on the shiny new game? What would you consider to be SOEs best "Free to play"model out of thier current stable of games?
To answer your question..................none
All their F2P models are crap....................SoE need to look at Rift model.
Comments
EQN has already been confirmed to be free to play. F2P is the future SOE says.
F2P as in, download the game day 1 from the internet and you're good to go.
This indeed is correct, though EQ2 is free to play; however you have to buy the expansions if you want to play the new content and utilize the "gold membership;s 15/month" to use the top tier gear. It is a sneaky free to play... just enough to give you a taste and make you want to throw a bit of cash at it. But who knows until 8/2
true lol but ive never spent money on a f2p game EVER... somehow i still find the way to keep up with subbed players because the devs forget to check every little bit of their game to make sure your restrcited.
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n64/redline3kgt/amberclose.jpg
as long as i can still sub and get the full version of the game without having to buy all this BS at the store then i am good.
people that want to play a gimped free version of the game can do it, i just don't see how they put up with that crap unless they have no other choice.
My main question when people bring up the cash shops is "What's the difference between $60 for the box +$15 a month.... and spending $15 - $20 a month on a f2P MMO cash shop?
At least with F2P you can...
1. Try it before you buy it.
2. Buy the cash shop items that mean the most to your experience.
I've found that I spend about the same amount of money in F2P games I enjoy as I did with original subscriptions.
So I don't mind either model. I've come to prefer F2P, since I don't enjoy every single MMORPG and being able to try it first at any time in it's lifespan is a real money saver.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
Having a crappy game architecture leads to cheating in games (IE: if you don't have all your operations server side people will find a way to cheat, really game design 101 here).
Botters and gold sellers exist due to demand, not due to game payment models, if you believe otherwise there are a few hundred chinese political prisoners, that are known of of course, who'll tell you just how painful sitting in front of a computer for 18 hours a day to farm gold in World of Warcraft to meet a quota is (and yes if they didn't meet their quota they would get beaten).
Personally I prefer B2P, but SoE is a big fan of F2P now so that is the most likely result.
I think The Secret World has handled B2P well, but I am not a fan of how GW2 has handled it. TSW gives nice chunks of content for a small fee, while GW2 gives it for free, but its all temporary and linked heavily to the cash shop. It just feels too pressured, while with TSW you can buy that content at any time and enjoy it for as long as you like.
F2P is hit and miss. While I don't mind the convenience aspect (faster levelling or skill gain for paying customers), when you deliberately turn the game into a RNG nightmare or massive grind (Neverwinter) to get the items without paying, it just loses its appeal. Or gating off content behind constant temporary ticketing (SWTOR and AoC). I think the best F2P models have been Aion and TERA, where it is purely cosmetic / convenience. Rift is fine, but the purchasing real gear aspect is a bit of a let down.
You're an idiot if you think that SoE isn't putting everything they've got into EQN. EQ is their flagship product and the game that gave them their name. It's the one game they have that truly matters, every other FTP piece of crap they have released is just that a FTP POS.
They know that this is their big ticket item and the only hope they will have for the next 10 years to stay relevant (or take the lead) in the MMO market. You're assumption is based off of the games that have been released as FTP over the last couple years. Name me one AAA MMO (aside from PS2 but come on who counts that shit) that has been released as a FTP game. I can't think of one.
SoE is really the first of the big companies (blizz,trion,ect,ect,) to make a HUGE AAA title and release it as FTP right off the bat. SoE believes in the FTP model because it works, and it works well if implemented right...
All that said I really don't have much of any faith in SoE. With their track record it will be a PoS but as a original 1999 EQ player I hope to god they pull off a miracle.
It's a sales trick, is basically what we're trying to tell you.
F2P works like advertising on crack (it brings in more players), more players makes game feel more alive for the players in it and it breeds more players. Then you got a lot of people who actually pay more than $15 a month on the cash shop.
So in the end, it brings in more customers and the spending customers tend to spend the same/more money.
As shown by another person on this thread with his links to marketing statistics, F2P is just the superior model.
The days where F2P equated to low budget or substandard quality are long past. F2P is the new industry standard in AAA products, despite what F2P brings to mind in your head.
Another thing is the the fact that $15 subs are restrictive. Many people don't have time to play the game for a month or two and see that they just "lost $15 -$30". Which weights on people as a negative (Spent money and got nothing from it).
With free2play, you can take a break and return hassle free. When you spend money you get something tangible for your cash.
It's the difference between paying $15 to get into a mall, and paying $15 to buy something in the mall. The latter is psychologically more appealing to many people. I personally didn't mind $15 a month, and $60 for the box, but F2P is a superior business model and has zero indication on the quality of the product.
There have been plenty of terrible pay to play games, there have been many good F2P games.
Legends of Kesmai, UO, EQ, AO, DAoC, AC, SB, RO, SWG, EVE, EQ2, CoH, GW, VG:SOH, WAR, Aion, DF, CO, MO, DN, Tera, SWTOR, RO2, DP, GW2, PS2, BnS, NW, FF:XIV, ESO, EQ:NL
There has been a single game to my knowledge that had all operations server side: Final Fantasy XIV. I would tell you to go see how that turned out, but they scrapped it.
I think a lot of players who really love EQN will subscribe no doubt.
I liked what brasse and dave said in this video regarding F2P.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVIIIZ6ETtY
SWG, Eve, Planetside 2, EQN, Star Citizen
Try again lad, any game that doesn't have a gameguard (or similar anti-hack/anti-cheat) system has most critical functions on the server. I was not referring to actually rendering the game or such, merely to all the operations regarding the outcomes of your actions in-game.
I would like to see SOE attempt "innovation" in regards to the payment model as well as all the other new things they are bringing to the table.
It can't be argued that there are plenty of people on all three sides of this issue, preferring Sub, B2P, and F2P.
I would like to see SOE cater to all of us personally, with separate servers for all three, I know it might take a bit more time, to release, but it would put some of this bickering about whats better to rest, and everyone could have the payment model with the benefits they feel that model brings to them.
Personally, I prefer sub based games. I feel the community is more invested in the game, it can keep the gold spammers from overrunning the chat, It saves me from having to play with every person that wants to wear their ass for a hat because they think its amusing ( at least to them) and then just make a new account, when people start to blackball them, and I also feel it leads people to feeling more entitled to try and push boundaries with their toons, because they pay for their time, so not as much need to conform to min/max ideas.
Just my opinions, perfect for me, probably not so much for you
couldn't be more wrong, it just means the devs notice the flaws in their product and need something to pull doubters over the line.
Introduce the cashcow, the F2P option.
a GOOD mmo can have a sub model without problems as players will see the quality.
F2P means devs have no confidence in a long life for their mmo with a sub model, and want to milk it as long as possible with a pay-to-win model.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
I hope they go with a GW2 buying and cash shop style instead of fully free to play with retarded cash shop items and prices.
I think GW2 has the perfect middle road, or perhaps the Eve Online subscription method, but that requires a full scale player build market and thats unique to Eve Online and it would require subs in the market to buy with ingame currency.
This might be very complicated to build inside a mmo as it needs to be fully player driven.
The easiest way is just o copy GW2 payment method i think ?
Anyway free to play is not realy my thing :P
Did you just compare LoL to a MMO?
He is right tho, F2P MMOs do not generate stable income over years. Its a quick way to make some money, and that is exactly the problem.
That's why we keeping getting crappy MMos, one after another.....
To answer your question..................none
All their F2P models are crap....................SoE need to look at Rift model.
That's why I hope it will be P2P.
dont forget SOE Player Studio
where players can design marketplace items to sell to each other but SOE gets most the cut (60%)
https://player-studio.soe.com/
https://www.everquest2.com/player-studio/faq#how-does-it-work
How does the Player Studio™ program work?
SOE's Player Studio program invites players to download sample geometry files for actual in-game objects and through the use of standard third party art tools, learn how to develop, design and personalize items of their own – from re-coloring and re-texturing, to reshaping an item's geometry. Once complete, players are encouraged to name and create a description for their item, describe how the item will fit into the prospective game’s ongoing narrative storyline, and submit it to SOE for review and possible inclusion in the SOE Marketplace. If a player-created item is selected for inclusion in the SOE Marketplace, SOE will share 40% of the net amount it receives from the sale of the item with the player that created the item.
EQ2 fan sites
It's quite amazing that some of you feel like you know better than businesses. As though you have their numbers. SOE has been around the block a time or two with MMOs, if F2P wasn't making them money, why on earth would they switch ALL of their games to F2P? It's not rocket science, SOE is making more money now.
SOE has stated numerous times that they are making more money now than they ever did before they went F2P.
I didn't compare LoL to an MMO. He said F2P doesn't make money long term, it most certainly does. "F2P provides a quick rush and then 2 months the income is gone." lol That quote is laughable, at best.
It's already confirmed it'll be F2P.
SWG, Eve, Planetside 2, EQN, Star Citizen
source link Pax 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVIIIZ6ETtYa
around 4:45
interviewer: is EQN ftp?
Smokejumper: yes
EQ2 fan sites