Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Well I am trying to keep this clean. The focus of my post is really to gauge if there are really more paying customers now in MMORPGs then before. We know more players play now then before there is a bigger market and most MMORPGs are free. If we count the rumored 40% of the player base that P2P in F2P and compared it to the peaks of pre-WoW P2P games is there a drastic difference in paying customers? This is excluding WoW itself.
Who knows.
The amount of actual paying customers, is an irrelevant point. There are more mmo players these days and F2P games make more money via whales.
Originally posted by DihoruGotta say refreshing to see stats that cork the opinion holes of P2P die-hards. It just gets frustrating after a point for the continuing abuse lobbed at F2Pers by P2Pers when in the end F2P games earn more and P2P games are slowly becoming niche products (which isn't good or bad, it's how it is supposed to be, certain games need to be P2P but most do not and never will justify monthly costs, it has been like this since the post-WoW clone wars started and its refreshing to see that the trend is starting to show that most games should be built with F2P in mind from the get go).
This is only because P2P diehards are clueless.The vast majority of the revenue from F2P is from subs/timecards. F2P has pretty much always been about subs, but P2P diehards are mostly clueless about F2P, and just make up stuff that they think sounds good.
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
Anyone want to start a betting pool on how long it will take narisseldon to respond to this post?
:-)
i am shocked that he has not already. how many more posts would it take? 15? XD
Originally posted by DihoruGotta say refreshing to see stats that cork the opinion holes of P2P die-hards. It just gets frustrating after a point for the continuing abuse lobbed at F2Pers by P2Pers when in the end F2P games earn more and P2P games are slowly becoming niche products (which isn't good or bad, it's how it is supposed to be, certain games need to be P2P but most do not and never will justify monthly costs, it has been like this since the post-WoW clone wars started and its refreshing to see that the trend is starting to show that most games should be built with F2P in mind from the get go).
This is only because P2P diehards are clueless.The vast majority of the revenue from F2P is from subs/timecards. F2P has pretty much always been about subs, but P2P diehards are mostly clueless about F2P, and just make up stuff that they think sounds good.
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
Anyone want to start a betting pool on how long it will take narisseldon to respond to this post?
:-)
i am shocked that he has not already. how many more posts would it take? 15? XD
Actually i may have to post less in the next few days. I may have to go on a plane because of family stuff
Oh .. this one ... simple .. you guys can't guess that i am going to say "whales"?
Originally posted by DihoruGotta say refreshing to see stats that cork the opinion holes of P2P die-hards. It just gets frustrating after a point for the continuing abuse lobbed at F2Pers by P2Pers when in the end F2P games earn more and P2P games are slowly becoming niche products (which isn't good or bad, it's how it is supposed to be, certain games need to be P2P but most do not and never will justify monthly costs, it has been like this since the post-WoW clone wars started and its refreshing to see that the trend is starting to show that most games should be built with F2P in mind from the get go).
This is only because P2P diehards are clueless.The vast majority of the revenue from F2P is from subs/timecards. F2P has pretty much always been about subs, but P2P diehards are mostly clueless about F2P, and just make up stuff that they think sounds good.
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
Anyone want to start a betting pool on how long it will take narisseldon to respond to this post?
:-)
i am shocked that he has not already. how many more posts would it take? 15? XD
Actually i may have to post less in the next few days. I may have to go on a plane because of family stuff
Oh .. this one ... simple .. you guys can't guess that i am going to say "whales"?
When you compare P2P and F2P, this is how it works:
P2P
Pay for Game > Play Game > Determine if you like it
F2P
Play Game > Determine if you like it> Pay for Game
F2P is only 'free' in the essance that you get to play the game without paying. The usual method for monitization is to sell a sub with premium benefits, as well as some combination of items/services. There really isnt much a difference in where customers choose to spend the money. The most popular method is the monthly sub, but there is also a lot of people who like to buy items/services. This is why most modern games (both P2P and F2P) have both options.
The only reason that F2P makes more than P2P is because it removes the biggest reason that people dont play the game... the upfront cost. Most people are more than willing to pay for a game, once they have tried it out, and decided it was for them. However, there are a lot less people that are willing to pay to find out if the game is for them...
they also consider shooters,moba's, bf heros ect as mmo's lol not to mention evony online in the numbers.... this is a marketing tool used to get investors. ...
And most of the P2P market is WoW (even if it has less than 8 mil players that's still around 1.3 bil per year currently), your point is what namely?
To the OP's question: There's burst spenders and then there's habitual spenders (those that don't always have money to spare and those that do) and in general both demographics have gone up, quite a bit with the bursters as they're more welcome in F2P games.
That the figures are fake, that it was surveyed through multi platforms. That it was distributed to get investors to invest in a ftp company.
and wow does not have most the p2p customers. Current p2p is 23 million. And I mean really if they are adding all platforms shouldnt it be b2p/p2p verse ftp?
Nope because B2P is adopting a more F2P system, the 23 million is globally and likely includes a couple of the F2P titles which in Asia are P2P otherwise you wouldn't get more than 12-13 mil currently in the western market ( EVE-Online + WoW + a few other minor P2P titles which don't have F2P options).
No its total p2p as ftp active accounts cant be tracked....... 23 million paid subs as of july 2013. Your thoughts do not produce facts...
Again only p2p subs. are tracked.... Get a clue bro, hell many ftp games have merged servers due to low populations..... example AOC...Ragnorak 2...
BTW how is buying a game considered ftp? I dont see how that works out.
On your last point: Because any F2P game worth its own salt you feel the need to invest in in one way or another just to at least thank the developers, with B2P games most of the have a trial or a free weekend (like GW2 often has) which convinces people that the barrier for entry is worth passing but after that initial barrier the game is more or less F2P.
Actually both F2P subs and P2P subs get tracked because you don't have to be a rocket scientist to count how many premium accounts you have on say World of Tanks (same can be done in any F2P game that offers a premium membership as these can most definitely be counted and kept track of, I know shocking).
As for servers being merged last I checked AoC is going for a single server paradigm in the vein of EVE-Online, it has been their stated goal for almost 2 years if not longer if my memory isn't failing me.
Ragnorak 2 that had a rocky ride and got a new iteration which was released this year but if you're pointing out this then I could point out games like Tabula Rasa or Vanguard Saga of Heroes (games which were good in theory but were DoA) or Star Wars The Old Republic or... .
Originally posted by Vermillion_Raventhal Well I am trying to keep this clean. The focus of my post is really to gauge if there are really more paying customers now in MMORPGs then before. We know more players play now then before there is a bigger market and most MMORPGs are free. If we count the rumored 40% of the player base that P2P in F2P and compared it to the peaks of pre-WoW P2P games is there a drastic difference in paying customers? This is excluding WoW itself.
world population keeps growing and growing, so there's more of every type of human, so that means more gamers too.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
they also consider shooters,moba's, bf heros ect as mmo's lol not to mention evony online in the numbers.... this is a marketing tool used to get investors. ...
And most of the P2P market is WoW (even if it has less than 8 mil players that's still around 1.3 bil per year currently), your point is what namely?
To the OP's question: There's burst spenders and then there's habitual spenders (those that don't always have money to spare and those that do) and in general both demographics have gone up, quite a bit with the bursters as they're more welcome in F2P games.
That the figures are fake, that it was surveyed through multi platforms. That it was distributed to get investors to invest in a ftp company.
and wow does not have most the p2p customers. Current p2p is 23 million. And I mean really if they are adding all platforms shouldnt it be b2p/p2p verse ftp?
Nope because B2P is adopting a more F2P system, the 23 million is globally and likely includes a couple of the F2P titles which in Asia are P2P otherwise you wouldn't get more than 12-13 mil currently in the western market ( EVE-Online + WoW + a few other minor P2P titles which don't have F2P options).
No its total p2p as ftp active accounts cant be tracked....... 23 million paid subs as of july 2013. Your thoughts do not produce facts...
Again only p2p subs. are tracked.... Get a clue bro, hell many ftp games have merged servers due to low populations..... example AOC...Ragnorak 2...
BTW how is buying a game considered ftp? I dont see how that works out.
On your last point: Because any F2P game worth its own salt you feel the need to invest in in one way or another just to at least thank the developers, with B2P games most of the have a trial or a free weekend (like GW2 often has) which convinces people that the barrier for entry is worth passing but after that initial barrier the game is more or less F2P.
Actually both F2P subs and P2P subs get tracked because you don't have to be a rocket scientist to count how many premium accounts you have on say World of Tanks (same can be done in any F2P game that offers a premium membership as these can most definitely be counted and kept track of, I know shocking).
As for servers being merged last I checked AoC is going for a single server paradigm in the vein of EVE-Online, it has been their stated goal for almost 2 years if not longer if my memory isn't failing me.
Ragnorak 2 that had a rocky ride and got a new iteration which was released this year but if you're pointing out this then I could point out games like Tabula Rasa or Vanguard Saga of Heroes (games which were good in theory but were DoA) or Star Wars The Old Republic or... .
Now tell us more about your facts, bro-chan.
You have no clue on anything really. How is free to play a buy to play game? lol ..... AOC merged servers due to populatipn check their of forums. Most FTP are seeing a loss of player base, seeing how they dont give out figures you can check their of forums as well...
GW2 is on example of a trail but then requires you to pay money so its not free,,,, lol your chart is dooky... your proof does not exist and learn the meaning of FTP.
Point out all the games you like still 23mill at about 12-15 bucks a month is more then your over the top numbers show in income of ftp.
FTP is a dying and soon to be proven format. Welcome to 2013....
Man I hate stats that include MOBAs and World of Tanks as MMOs. No sane and logical person would ever call a 5 v 5 match massive.
I think more people use those examples to specifically skew the benefits of F2P because LoL is a mega success game which happens to be F2P. So if you now call it an MMO, F2P MMOs are suddenly doing a ton better.
Originally posted by Dihoru Gotta say refreshing to see stats that cork the opinion holes of P2P die-hards. It just gets frustrating after a point for the continuing abuse lobbed at F2Pers by P2Pers when in the end F2P games earn more and P2P games are slowly becoming niche products (which isn't good or bad, it's how it is supposed to be, certain games need to be P2P but most do not and never will justify monthly costs, it has been like this since the post-WoW clone wars started and its refreshing to see that the trend is starting to show that most games should be built with F2P in mind from the get go).
This is only because P2P diehards are clueless.
The vast majority of the revenue from F2P is from subs/timecards. F2P has pretty much always been about subs, but P2P diehards are mostly clueless about F2P, and just make up stuff that they think sounds good.
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
It comes from the 80-90% of each game's playerbase that spends nothing, but you've already made your mind up on the matter, so I doubt that linking to any facts or data on the subject will change what you choose to believe here.
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking? And unless those 200,000 pony up what is needed to keep that game going, how long till such a game goes belly up? No thank you. I will pay for what I use but not for what some free loader wishes to steal.
Man I hate stats that include MOBAs and World of Tanks as MMOs. No sane and logical person would ever call a 5 v 5 match massive.
I think more people use those examples to specifically skew the benefits of F2P because LoL is a mega success game which happens to be F2P. So if you now call it an MMO, F2P MMOs are suddenly doing a ton better.
Even without LoL and the MOBAs in the mix, F2P in every other aspect of MMO (PBBG, MMORPG, MMORTS, etc) is doing very well.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
It comes from the 80-90% of each game's playerbase that spends nothing, but you've already made your mind up on the matter, so I doubt that linking to any facts or data on the subject will change what you choose to believe here.
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking? And unless those 200,000 pony up what is needed to keep that game going, how long till such a game goes belly up? No thank you. I will pay for what I use but not for what some free loader wishes to steal.
There's a clear lack of understanding of how the business model works in your post, both in your perception that the ratio is somehow flawed for the model and in the type of revenue the model generates. Sadly, your closing sentence speaks volumes as to your interest in actually understanding it.
Look, what you, personally, want to play or pay for is up to you, and no one is questioning or trying to change that. You asked where the F2P part comes in and I told you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Man I hate stats that include MOBAs and World of Tanks as MMOs. No sane and logical person would ever call a 5 v 5 match massive.
I think more people use those examples to specifically skew the benefits of F2P because LoL is a mega success game which happens to be F2P. So if you now call it an MMO, F2P MMOs are suddenly doing a ton better.
Even without LoL and the MOBAs in the mix, F2P in every other aspect of MMO (PBBG, MMORPG, MMORTS, etc) is doing very well.
I'm not saying F2P isn't doing well.
Much like WoW is the largest subscriber based MMO. LoL is likely the biggest F2P game out there and WoT rakes in the money too. The top of that statistics chart even mentions LoL and WoT taking an even bigger piece of the pie. That chart shows a very slim margin of F2P spending beating out P2P spending. I wouldn't be surprised that if you took the non-MMOs out of it (all of the MOBAs and WoT) that P2P would have the bigger piece. Considering how many F2P people like to latch on to anything that shows the F2P MMOs being the bigger share of money making, that is significant.
It also matters as F2P and B2P play a much much bigger role in the rest of the game market. Subscription packages are mostly limited to the MMO market so the comparison needs to be very accurate to see trends. Pulling in other game categories muddies the waters and makes all of the statistical analysis pointless due to inaccuracies.
It wouldn't be much different from saying "See how successful Candy Crush Saga is!!! Sub based MMOs are clearly on the decline". It is simply a comparison that makes no sense.
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking?
Whales, of course. Don't tell me you have never heard of them. It works out pretty well so far. Whales pays. I play for free.
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking?
Whales, of course. Don't tell me you have never heard of them. It works out pretty well so far. Whales pays. I play for free.
Is there any proof that whales really exist, or in any substantial numbers?
Is there any published information that game A has X number of whales who typically spend X number of dollars, perhaps broken down into tiers such as >10K, 5K- 10K, etc?
I'm starting to think they are more a thing of legend. I wonder how much their spending is compared to the under 10 buck a month club?
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking?
Whales, of course. Don't tell me you have never heard of them. It works out pretty well so far. Whales pays. I play for free.
Is there any proof that whales really exist, or in any substantial numbers?
Is there any published information that game A has X number of whales who typically spend X number of dollars, perhaps broken down into tiers such as >10K, 5K- 10K, etc?
I'm starting to think they are more a thing of legend. I wonder how much their spending is compared to the under 10 buck a month club?
Whales don't exist, not even in any significant minority. Just like everywhere else, you have addicts, but the vast majority is just many people who pay a bit when they consider the game worth paying for.
Whales is just an excuse made up by the "leeches", like "we don't pay, but no worries, whales are here to save the day".
Website says "free to play" so I "play for free". I don't know how else to interpret 'free to play' except that you play for free. that's the point of f2p.
Infomercials must really amaze you. Marketing hype words is different from the facts and/or the intent of the actual product.
Companies are not intending that people can really play for free. They are intending that you can get into the game at no charge, and then end up "wanting" to pay to get further into the game. About the only time they are actually ok with players playing for free is when those players can trade in-game items to other players for a currency that can go to paying for a limited time subscription because then every player is paid for even if not through themselves.
Originally posted by tom_gore F2P doesn't mean you don't spend money on the game.
For many players, it means exactly that.
The last money I spent in MMO was a pre-order of GW2. I used to spend $15-$45 a month, years ago.
- 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
Is there any proof that whales really exist, or in any substantial numbers?
Is there any published information that game A has X number of whales who typically spend X number of dollars, perhaps broken down into tiers such as >10K, 5K- 10K, etc?
I'm starting to think they are more a thing of legend. I wonder how much their spending is compared to the under 10 buck a month club?
I'd post links but, truthfully, I don't think you guys really want answers. That could be the only possible reason why you ask the same questions over and over again about F2P and then, not only reject industry-accepted data sources for the information, but completely forget that the discussion even existed by the next thread.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I haven't seen an MMO released as a F2P that I thought was worth playing never mind paying. If your game is any good and I want to play, give me the option of a sub because I don't want to bother with all the bologna.
Originally posted by Dihoru Gotta say refreshing to see stats that cork the opinion holes of P2P die-hards. It just gets frustrating after a point for the continuing abuse lobbed at F2Pers by P2Pers when in the end F2P games earn more and P2P games are slowly becoming niche products (which isn't good or bad, it's how it is supposed to be, certain games need to be P2P but most do not and never will justify monthly costs, it has been like this since the post-WoW clone wars started and its refreshing to see that the trend is starting to show that most games should be built with F2P in mind from the get go).
This is only because P2P diehards are clueless.
The vast majority of the revenue from F2P is from subs/timecards. F2P has pretty much always been about subs, but P2P diehards are mostly clueless about F2P, and just make up stuff that they think sounds good.
So, where does the "free" part of f2p come from? Obviously, a so-called f2p game has to MAKE MONEY in order to keep its doors open. So yes, they must be getting money somewhere. Doesn't that really make so-called f2p to really be P2P? Isn't f2p a mislabel that is used by marketing types to FOOL players into going through the ding joint so they SPEND money in the end.
This. There is no such thing as F2P. Someone has to pay to keep the game going, and to allow content. If you have a game and you pay nothing to play it, you can bet there is someone who is paying bucketloads of money to cover "your share."
Saying a game is F2P is like saying there is such a thing as free health care. It doesn't exist. Someone, somewhere is paying for it. And most F2P games take features you would have readily available in a subscription model, strips them down and resells them to you in pieces.
I am not strictly opposed to the F2P model, and think it opens the doors for a lot of people. What I do not like is games that call themselves F2P, but then charge unreasonably high prices for the optional components you can buy for the game.
Planetside 2 did F2P pretty well in my book. I enjoyed the game, my progress in the game was not particularly hampered when I didn't pay in money, and at a reasonable rate I was able to buy SC that procured the things I wanted in the game at reasonably fair prices.
That said, if a game I enjoy has both the F2P and Sub options, I *always* pay the sub.
I would agree F2P is pretty much a marketing tool. People love the word Free.
Yeah. Gotta say it is bizarre to think Nariu is right about something.
Whales aren't magical things players believe in, it's a term used by developers as much as anything else, and tends to get referenced when a developer talks on the subject. Axehilt's platonic love, Raph Koster, for example.
Analytics like Playnomics have played a role in reaffirming that aw well.
And a while back another user linked us to this Gamasutra article.
You have a much more obvious offshoot now if you look at funding sites like Kickstarter. The fact you have $500+ tiers that people will buy into as backers for a game has a clear indication that there's a subset that's willing to pay in for good they won't even receive for an indefinite period of time.
EDIT: For clarification. It's true that no title, even F2P, stay afloat on nothing. Someone pays for that game to keep running.
The problem seems to be entirely semantic in that people are attacking the word 'free'. Yes, it's semantically true that a free to play game isn't properly free, because someone somewhere is paying for it. But that doesn't mean every person has to nor that every person is. On an individual user experience, a gamer can and frequently does benefit from what amounts to either free or exceptionally cheap play.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
One can argue about numbers and statistics, but so far, i have spent exactly zero on F2P MMORPGs. So to me, it is all free fun. I don't know exactly how many whales are out there .. but certainly enough for now.
I wouldnt put much stock in this info at all they are basing there information from the responses of less than 1% of the 160 million worlwide players ..33,000 people responded .. this info isnt gathered from publishers or developers .. just from 33,00 people that responded to them .. not much of a sample for anyone to take this seriously...
I wouldnt put much stock in this info at all they are basing there information from the responses of less than 1% of the 160 million worlwide players ..33,000 people responded .. this info isnt gathered from publishers or developers .. just from 33,00 people that responded to them .. not much of a sample for anyone to take this seriously...
You have no clue about sampling, do you?
Politicians, the media, interests groups ... all take polls seriously and a poll in the US is done with mere thousands of people (much less than 33 thousands) to represent opinions of the whole country (300M .. way more than 160M).
In fact, i would say this info is great .. much better statistics and accuracy than political polls.
Comments
Who knows.
The amount of actual paying customers, is an irrelevant point. There are more mmo players these days and F2P games make more money via whales.
i am shocked that he has not already. how many more posts would it take? 15? XD
Actually i may have to post less in the next few days. I may have to go on a plane because of family stuff
Oh .. this one ... simple .. you guys can't guess that i am going to say "whales"?
When you compare P2P and F2P, this is how it works:
P2P
Pay for Game > Play Game > Determine if you like it
F2P
Play Game > Determine if you like it> Pay for Game
F2P is only 'free' in the essance that you get to play the game without paying. The usual method for monitization is to sell a sub with premium benefits, as well as some combination of items/services. There really isnt much a difference in where customers choose to spend the money. The most popular method is the monthly sub, but there is also a lot of people who like to buy items/services. This is why most modern games (both P2P and F2P) have both options.
The only reason that F2P makes more than P2P is because it removes the biggest reason that people dont play the game... the upfront cost. Most people are more than willing to pay for a game, once they have tried it out, and decided it was for them. However, there are a lot less people that are willing to pay to find out if the game is for them...
On your last point: Because any F2P game worth its own salt you feel the need to invest in in one way or another just to at least thank the developers, with B2P games most of the have a trial or a free weekend (like GW2 often has) which convinces people that the barrier for entry is worth passing but after that initial barrier the game is more or less F2P.
Actually both F2P subs and P2P subs get tracked because you don't have to be a rocket scientist to count how many premium accounts you have on say World of Tanks
(same can be done in any F2P game that offers a premium membership as these can most definitely be counted and kept track of, I know shocking).
As for servers being merged last I checked AoC is going for a single server paradigm in the vein of EVE-Online, it has been their stated goal for almost 2 years if not longer if my memory isn't failing me.
Ragnorak 2 that had a rocky ride and got a new iteration which was released this year but if you're pointing out this then I could point out games like Tabula Rasa or Vanguard Saga of Heroes (games which were good in theory but were DoA) or Star Wars The Old Republic or... .
Now tell us more about your facts, bro-chan.
world population keeps growing and growing, so there's more of every type of human, so that means more gamers too.
"going into arguments with idiots is a lost cause, it requires you to stoop down to their level and you can't win"
You have no clue on anything really. How is free to play a buy to play game? lol ..... AOC merged servers due to populatipn check their of forums. Most FTP are seeing a loss of player base, seeing how they dont give out figures you can check their of forums as well...
GW2 is on example of a trail but then requires you to pay money so its not free,,,, lol your chart is dooky... your proof does not exist and learn the meaning of FTP.
Point out all the games you like still 23mill at about 12-15 bucks a month is more then your over the top numbers show in income of ftp.
FTP is a dying and soon to be proven format. Welcome to 2013....
Man I hate stats that include MOBAs and World of Tanks as MMOs. No sane and logical person would ever call a 5 v 5 match massive.
I think more people use those examples to specifically skew the benefits of F2P because LoL is a mega success game which happens to be F2P. So if you now call it an MMO, F2P MMOs are suddenly doing a ton better.
And who is it that is PAYING for that "80-90%" that are playing for "free". So, a game with 1,000,000 players has only 200,000 PAYING for 800,000 to play absolutely for free? What's wrong with that thinking? And unless those 200,000 pony up what is needed to keep that game going, how long till such a game goes belly up? No thank you. I will pay for what I use but not for what some free loader wishes to steal.
Let's party like it is 1863!
Even without LoL and the MOBAs in the mix, F2P in every other aspect of MMO (PBBG, MMORPG, MMORTS, etc) is doing very well.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
There's a clear lack of understanding of how the business model works in your post, both in your perception that the ratio is somehow flawed for the model and in the type of revenue the model generates. Sadly, your closing sentence speaks volumes as to your interest in actually understanding it.
Look, what you, personally, want to play or pay for is up to you, and no one is questioning or trying to change that. You asked where the F2P part comes in and I told you.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I'm not saying F2P isn't doing well.
Much like WoW is the largest subscriber based MMO. LoL is likely the biggest F2P game out there and WoT rakes in the money too. The top of that statistics chart even mentions LoL and WoT taking an even bigger piece of the pie. That chart shows a very slim margin of F2P spending beating out P2P spending. I wouldn't be surprised that if you took the non-MMOs out of it (all of the MOBAs and WoT) that P2P would have the bigger piece. Considering how many F2P people like to latch on to anything that shows the F2P MMOs being the bigger share of money making, that is significant.
It also matters as F2P and B2P play a much much bigger role in the rest of the game market. Subscription packages are mostly limited to the MMO market so the comparison needs to be very accurate to see trends. Pulling in other game categories muddies the waters and makes all of the statistical analysis pointless due to inaccuracies.
It wouldn't be much different from saying "See how successful Candy Crush Saga is!!! Sub based MMOs are clearly on the decline". It is simply a comparison that makes no sense.
Whales, of course. Don't tell me you have never heard of them. It works out pretty well so far. Whales pays. I play for free.
Is there any proof that whales really exist, or in any substantial numbers?
Is there any published information that game A has X number of whales who typically spend X number of dollars, perhaps broken down into tiers such as >10K, 5K- 10K, etc?
I'm starting to think they are more a thing of legend. I wonder how much their spending is compared to the under 10 buck a month club?
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Whales don't exist, not even in any significant minority. Just like everywhere else, you have addicts, but the vast majority is just many people who pay a bit when they consider the game worth paying for.
Whales is just an excuse made up by the "leeches", like "we don't pay, but no worries, whales are here to save the day".
My computer is better than yours.
Infomercials must really amaze you. Marketing hype words is different from the facts and/or the intent of the actual product.
Companies are not intending that people can really play for free. They are intending that you can get into the game at no charge, and then end up "wanting" to pay to get further into the game. About the only time they are actually ok with players playing for free is when those players can trade in-game items to other players for a currency that can go to paying for a limited time subscription because then every player is paid for even if not through themselves.
The last money I spent in MMO was a pre-order of GW2. I used to spend $15-$45 a month, years ago.
- 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
I'd post links but, truthfully, I don't think you guys really want answers. That could be the only possible reason why you ask the same questions over and over again about F2P and then, not only reject industry-accepted data sources for the information, but completely forget that the discussion even existed by the next thread.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I haven't seen an MMO released as a F2P that I thought was worth playing never mind paying. If your game is any good and I want to play, give me the option of a sub because I don't want to bother with all the bologna.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
This. There is no such thing as F2P. Someone has to pay to keep the game going, and to allow content. If you have a game and you pay nothing to play it, you can bet there is someone who is paying bucketloads of money to cover "your share."
Saying a game is F2P is like saying there is such a thing as free health care. It doesn't exist. Someone, somewhere is paying for it. And most F2P games take features you would have readily available in a subscription model, strips them down and resells them to you in pieces.
I am not strictly opposed to the F2P model, and think it opens the doors for a lot of people. What I do not like is games that call themselves F2P, but then charge unreasonably high prices for the optional components you can buy for the game.
Planetside 2 did F2P pretty well in my book. I enjoyed the game, my progress in the game was not particularly hampered when I didn't pay in money, and at a reasonable rate I was able to buy SC that procured the things I wanted in the game at reasonably fair prices.
That said, if a game I enjoy has both the F2P and Sub options, I *always* pay the sub.
I would agree F2P is pretty much a marketing tool. People love the word Free.
Yeah. Gotta say it is bizarre to think Nariu is right about something.
Whales aren't magical things players believe in, it's a term used by developers as much as anything else, and tends to get referenced when a developer talks on the subject. Axehilt's platonic love, Raph Koster, for example.
Analytics like Playnomics have played a role in reaffirming that aw well.
And a while back another user linked us to this Gamasutra article.
Similarly this one.
You have a much more obvious offshoot now if you look at funding sites like Kickstarter. The fact you have $500+ tiers that people will buy into as backers for a game has a clear indication that there's a subset that's willing to pay in for good they won't even receive for an indefinite period of time.
EDIT: For clarification. It's true that no title, even F2P, stay afloat on nothing. Someone pays for that game to keep running.
The problem seems to be entirely semantic in that people are attacking the word 'free'. Yes, it's semantically true that a free to play game isn't properly free, because someone somewhere is paying for it. But that doesn't mean every person has to nor that every person is. On an individual user experience, a gamer can and frequently does benefit from what amounts to either free or exceptionally cheap play.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Thanks Deivos for all the links.
I just want to add one point.
One can argue about numbers and statistics, but so far, i have spent exactly zero on F2P MMORPGs. So to me, it is all free fun. I don't know exactly how many whales are out there .. but certainly enough for now.
I wouldnt put much stock in this info at all they are basing there information from the responses of less than 1% of the 160 million worlwide players ..33,000 people responded .. this info isnt gathered from publishers or developers .. just from 33,00 people that responded to them .. not much of a sample for anyone to take this seriously...
You have no clue about sampling, do you?
Politicians, the media, interests groups ... all take polls seriously and a poll in the US is done with mere thousands of people (much less than 33 thousands) to represent opinions of the whole country (300M .. way more than 160M).
In fact, i would say this info is great .. much better statistics and accuracy than political polls.