Simple, you offer a significantly better product that isn't free.
Quality is only a distinguishing factor AFTER the product is used. This is why a known (but not as good) product will do better than an unknown (and potentially better) product. Free gets the consumer to try the product, and then compare this known, vs a potential unknown. This removes the actual quality comparison. This is especially true of consumers who have been burned by advertising in the past, and therefore do not believe the 'promise' of a quality product that is P2P.
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
Simple, you offer a significantly better product that isn't free.
Quality is only a distinguishing factor AFTER the product is used. This is why a known (but not as good) product will do better than an unknown (and potentially better) product. Free gets the consumer to try the product, and then compare this known, vs a potential unknown. This removes the actual quality comparison. This is especially true of consumers who have been burned by advertising in the past, and therefore do not believe the 'promise' of a quality product that is P2P.
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
"Exclusivity", "rarity", as in a quality product that's different than the common fair of FtP games? (MMORPGs, that is.)
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Just wanted to point out, that Buy 2 Play games are still good enough in my opinion vs. Free 2 Play competitors. Yes, it would be F2P after purchasing the initial game, but at least there is a payment requirement in order to play the game. This helps to eliminate the main issues that plague F2P games. Such as exploiters, cheaters, hackers, gold farmers, and piss poor communities. GW2 is a great example of how B2P helps to alleviate a large portion of those unending issues. I can't say for certain if GW2's cash shop qualifies as P2W, but as far as I remember, it wasn't. That makes GW2 the ideal model of monetization in my opinion.
F2P games always have been and always will be gimmicky concepts that focus more on sneaking money out of your pocket than actually providing a worthwhile game.
The game itself isn't P2W, per se, but the economy itself is. You can use real world currency to buy the gems used in their cash shop. You can then use the in-game gem market to trade your gems for in game gold, allowing you to buy whatever you want. This removes the need to earn your money to buy stuff, which does give an advantage to those with more real world money.
Simple, you offer a significantly better product that isn't free.
Quality is only a distinguishing factor AFTER the product is used. This is why a known (but not as good) product will do better than an unknown (and potentially better) product. Free gets the consumer to try the product, and then compare this known, vs a potential unknown. This removes the actual quality comparison. This is especially true of consumers who have been burned by advertising in the past, and therefore do not believe the 'promise' of a quality product that is P2P.
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
"Exclusivity", "rarity", as in a quality product that's different than the common fair of FtP games? (MMORPGs, that is.)
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Exclusivity and Rarity are not about quality, they are about availability. Everyone can have a free product, not everyone can have a rare product.
As for people getting information from third party sites, well as long as you think someone else opinion is as good as yours.... you would be correct. However, personal experience has shown to be a stronger influence than any second hand source.
You may believe that people can be convinced that X is better than Y... but when they have Y in hand, they tend not to believe it. This is a sales approach that has worked for thousands of years, and will likely continue in the future.
Simple, you offer a significantly better product that isn't free.
Quality is only a distinguishing factor AFTER the product is used. This is why a known (but not as good) product will do better than an unknown (and potentially better) product. Free gets the consumer to try the product, and then compare this known, vs a potential unknown. This removes the actual quality comparison. This is especially true of consumers who have been burned by advertising in the past, and therefore do not believe the 'promise' of a quality product that is P2P.
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
"Exclusivity", "rarity", as in a quality product that's different than the common fair of FtP games? (MMORPGs, that is.)
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Internet opinions don't always work because everyone has different tastes. The internet hated Vanguard. I loved it. The internet said Tabula Rasa was crap. I loved it. The internet underrates indie niche games such as Ryzom, that have more depth in 10 minutes of gameplay than most games have in thousands of hours. I love it too. Most people would disagree with me, or maybe they might like one or two of the three. As I said, we all have different opinions.
Simple, you offer a significantly better product that isn't free.
Quality is only a distinguishing factor AFTER the product is used. This is why a known (but not as good) product will do better than an unknown (and potentially better) product. Free gets the consumer to try the product, and then compare this known, vs a potential unknown. This removes the actual quality comparison. This is especially true of consumers who have been burned by advertising in the past, and therefore do not believe the 'promise' of a quality product that is P2P.
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
"Exclusivity", "rarity", as in a quality product that's different than the common fair of FtP games? (MMORPGs, that is.)
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Internet opinions don't always work because everyone has different tastes. The internet hated Vanguard. I loved it. The internet said Tabula Rasa was crap. I loved it. The internet underrates indie niche games such as Ryzom, that have more depth in 10 minutes of gameplay than most games have in thousands of hours. I love it too. Most people would disagree with me, or maybe they might like one or two of the three. As I said, we all have different opinions.
I agree with that, but what I'm getting at is that it's quite possible to determine the quality of a game by researching it on the net yourself. I never just take other people's opinions. I take the info I can gather from them, plus video's and what other people say, and decide for myself. Anyone can. Of course, that's not foolproof. But neither is playing a game until you've actually played it extensively.
"Exclusivity", "rarity", as in a quality product that's different than the common fair of FtP games? (MMORPGs, that is.)
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Exclusivity and Rarity are not about quality, they are about availability. Everyone can have a free product, not everyone can have a rare product. (snip)
But they can be part of what makes a product "quality". Or not, of course. But they can be what distinguishes a product, making it a "quality product".
By cat out the bag your going to prove you post long pointless post with NOT a single link to back up any of your gibberish. Anyone can write a wall of text talking about stuff they don't have a clue on, adding numbers they have no links or proof on.
If by baby bells you mean bitter vets like you who the genre passed by will continue to complain about an industry that is doing better then ever without them....then yep you actually got something right...
And no you don't get paid by MMORPG companies just stop with that nonsense. If you did you wouldn't be on this site where 0.01% of mmorpg players come claiming you did.
The interweb is an amazing place...we can be anything we want...unfortunately real life always wins...
See watch this...
I own one of the largest video game comprises in the world. All my data is proprietary info so I can't disclose its sources. But just take my word for it here on the interweb I'm telling the truth.
Please PM me with your company name and maybe we can do business in this make believe world of the interweb
I see, you are -thee- internet tough guy hunh? All mad & disgruntled and attacking people, instead of proving them wrong.
Read. I already said you do not have to use my data, you can use any of the standing data that is floating around. [mod edit]
Haha sure I'll wager you buddy...good luck getting Pantheon out the door. Clearly your agenda is investing money into that game. That's why you spout this nonsense about wow,Swtor, Ffxiv and other quality games out now. [mod edit]
Its the same booze whether you go to a no cover charge dive, or an exclusive club.
So why is it that everyone wants to get in the exclusive club?
Because the cover charge acts as a good filter for the kind of person you'll see, and the kind of person you want to be.
Don't get me wrong. I can see why the publishers went free to play as a way to get those late adopters and luddites who are too squeamish about a paywall into online games. But by now, they ought to know that their image has been so eroded over time that they look like some hole for the vice addled and the basket cases, occupying a niche slightly more disrespectable than fantasy football and slightly more respectable than online poker.
The real gamers are buying to play, investing in preorders and paying $15 a month for Playstation Plus, just like they always do. They feel it is worth it, because the developers of said titles and subscription media made it worth something.
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
Do you feel that basic fact of brand valuation is the only factor involved in selling a product? Or do you think maybe the basic fact that F2P makes more revenue a more significant factor to these companies?
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
Do you feel that basic fact of brand valuation is the only factor involved in selling a product? Or do you think maybe the basic fact that F2P makes more revenue a more significant factor to these companies?
I think it depends on how you look at the games. I think a lot of the f2p mobile apps like Game of War work by a shotgun approach; getting high market penetration because the app is simple to download and access. People who buy these things buy them because it's a way to waste time on the train. They don't buy them to be a part of a "scene" or a "clique" of like-minded folk.
F2P business strategy works like the concession stand at the ballpark, selling beers. You can make a lot of money when you have 35,000 patrons. If only 1% buy a beer, at $7.00 a bottle, that's $2500 of beer sold (and scaleable goods like apps are a whole lot more cost effective than non-scaleable goods like beers). We can say that the ballpark does most of the work for the beer seller, since it gives them a captive audience. It's the same dynamic that works for F2P writ large.
But I would say that MMOs, because of the cult-like devotion to them inherent in the MMO culture, attract a different kind of consumer, one that's more conspicuous and more similar to the club hopper than the guy who buys a beer in the 5th inning. To attract this kind of person, you need to build a scene that hits the right cues. Paywalls, I would argue, do not diminish the appeal of the kind of experience these people crave. If anything, it enhances it.
Again, I don't doubt that F2P makes a lot of revenue. Then again, the thread is about how to compete with free. Well, I would argue that the way you compete with free is the same way clubs with a cover charge compete with corner pubs who offer no cover charge: by offering a scene you can't get at the corner pub.
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
I can't believe you don't know that they make tons of money by giving it away and find the whales.
Ask yourself ... can riotgames give away LoL? Given that tens of millions of players are playing that game every day ... i think the answer is "yes".
Again, I don't doubt that F2P makes a lot of revenue. Then again, the thread is about how to compete with free. Well, I would argue that the way you compete with free is the same way clubs with a cover charge compete with corner pubs who offer no cover charge: by offering a scene you can't get at the corner pub.
Well, if you cannot beat them, join them. How to compete with free .. isn't the answer obvious? Be free.
Here is the top 10 MMO money makers in 2014. One is sub-only .. that is WOW. Good luck for anyone tries to duplicate that.
Now no doubt someone can make a niche sub-only game and get like a few thousand players .. but we are talking about competing, not hiding and go for another market.
To answer your question, make a good game and have it keeped gamers sucked in for years.
Since no good games have been made, they are having trouble competing with f2p.
Why would any dev base their business strategy on a time horizon (years) that is highly unpredictable? Who knows what is the newest entertainment technology even 1 or 2 years down the road.
If i were them, i would much rather make a fun couple of weeks game (which lots of successful single player games are like that ... MMORPGs should learn from that).
Maybe, just maybe there are many players out there who stuck with a game for years, because it gave them something no other game on the market today can.
If the game is good enough, players will be willing to invest and not want to jump to another ship. This means the free games couldn't compete because they only focus on money, while this 1 good game would focus on the players and what can be provided for them.
If you want a 2week game... well... you are already getting this. So what's the problem?
No problem. I already have an abundance of entertainment, and I don't need more.
But the question is how to compete with f2p ... and I am just trying to answer it .. and one way is to be more like single player games. Those still sells. Clearly they are doing better (just look at D3, SC2, Dishonored and so on ...) than sub-only long term games.
You said "players will be willing to invest" ... you have data? I would say given the proliferation of f2p games, the demise (or close to demise) of sub-only games, players are NOT willing to "invest" in long term. They want quick, convenient entertainment, and they can change their minds quickly (look at how farmville thrived and then declined).
To answer your question, make a good game and have it keeped gamers sucked in for years.
Since no good games have been made, they are having trouble competing with f2p.
Why would any dev base their business strategy on a time horizon (years) that is highly unpredictable? Who knows what is the newest entertainment technology even 1 or 2 years down the road.
If i were them, i would much rather make a fun couple of weeks game (which lots of successful single player games are like that ... MMORPGs should learn from that).
Maybe, just maybe there are many players out there who stuck with a game for years, because it gave them something no other game on the market today can.
If the game is good enough, players will be willing to invest and not want to jump to another ship. This means the free games couldn't compete because they only focus on money, while this 1 good game would focus on the players and what can be provided for them.
If you want a 2week game... well... you are already getting this. So what's the problem?
No problem. I already have an abundance of entertainment, and I don't need more.
But the question is how to compete with f2p ... and I am just trying to answer it .. and one way is to be more like single player games. Those still sells. Clearly they are doing better (just look at D3, SC2, Dishonored and so on ...) than sub-only long term games.
You said "players will be willing to invest" ... you have data? I would say given the proliferation of f2p games, the demise (or close to demise) of sub-only games, players are NOT willing to "invest" in long term. They want quick, convenient entertainment, and they can change their minds quickly (look at how farmville thrived and then declined).
Sticking to the MMORPG scene, how about WoW? One of WoW's big success stories is their retention rate. In early years, it was 30%+/-. And that blew the rest of the industry away. Yet, that's the common figure in all business models for success, so I wonder where the rest of the MMORPG industry has been. Well, not anywhere really, just Themepark clone design for the most part. And that explains the lack of -good- data sources too.
To answer your question, make a good game and have it keeped gamers sucked in for years.
Since no good games have been made, they are having trouble competing with f2p.
Why would any dev base their business strategy on a time horizon (years) that is highly unpredictable? Who knows what is the newest entertainment technology even 1 or 2 years down the road.
If i were them, i would much rather make a fun couple of weeks game (which lots of successful single player games are like that ... MMORPGs should learn from that).
Maybe, just maybe there are many players out there who stuck with a game for years, because it gave them something no other game on the market today can.
If the game is good enough, players will be willing to invest and not want to jump to another ship. This means the free games couldn't compete because they only focus on money, while this 1 good game would focus on the players and what can be provided for them.
If you want a 2week game... well... you are already getting this. So what's the problem?
No problem. I already have an abundance of entertainment, and I don't need more.
But the question is how to compete with f2p ... and I am just trying to answer it .. and one way is to be more like single player games. Those still sells. Clearly they are doing better (just look at D3, SC2, Dishonored and so on ...) than sub-only long term games.
You said "players will be willing to invest" ... you have data? I would say given the proliferation of f2p games, the demise (or close to demise) of sub-only games, players are NOT willing to "invest" in long term. They want quick, convenient entertainment, and they can change their minds quickly (look at how farmville thrived and then declined).
Free generates a high user base. However, if that increased user base does not add value, then it is generally not beneficial for the game to use a free approach. Single player games are a good example of this. If there is no multiplayer element (or it is severely limited), then the value of having more people play the game does not increase the value of the game.
However, this does not mean that single player games can not do well as free games. Look at mobile games such as candy crush. This is clearly a single player game that has benefited from the value of free. The reason that free helped so much is that the biggest issue with mobile games is discoverability. Making the game free allowed it to top the charts, and become more visible. This allowed them to gain the benefit of the free user outside of the game, in in the marketplace.
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
I can't believe you don't know that they make tons of money by giving it away and find the whales.
Ask yourself ... can riotgames give away LoL? Given that tens of millions of players are playing that game every day ... i think the answer is "yes".
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
I can't believe you don't know that they make tons of money by giving it away and find the whales.
Ask yourself ... can riotgames give away LoL? Given that tens of millions of players are playing that game every day ... i think the answer is "yes".
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
The reason that people are willing to pay lots of money for a game is the social aspect. This is the difference between having a band play at your house, or having them give a concert. Whales want the concert atmosphere, and are willing to put up the money for it.... everyone else just gets a free concert.
You operate under the principle "You get what you pay for" Then you understand you really don't have to compete with "free" and that "Free" in most cases is a gimmick. Even if it's not......Well, I've played "free" games, but generally not for very long. After a very short time, I'm either paying or leaving. Within these "free" games, paying will be required to enhance the experience to an acceptable. And paying for a really good experience will probably be expensive. So...How do you compete? Find your demographic. Research your competitor's games. You look at where the average player experience is from those who are willing to pay. Then you gauge your business model according to that.
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
Because you can't be certain that whales won't go to other games, and you want to keep discover new whales.
Devs don't know where the new whales are .. hence the only viable strategy is to let as many players in as possible, and try to identify the whales once they are in.
I am sure they work very hard to keep the whales they found, but given the short retention of f2p MMOs, i doubt doing just that is enough. They have to keep finding new ones.
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
Because you can't be certain that whales won't go to other games, and you want to keep discover new whales.
Devs don't know where the new whales are .. hence the only viable strategy is to let as many players in as possible, and try to identify the whales once they are in.
I am sure they work very hard to keep the whales they found, but given the short retention of f2p MMOs, i doubt doing just that is enough. They have to keep finding new ones.
Most F2P MMORPG games can keep a player for 3-5 years. Those that invest the most, are the most likely to stay, which means that the whales are often the core retainers (once they are convinced to buy in).
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
Because it's software.
When someone builds a country club to capitalize on rich people, they have physical capacity limitations to limit access to their product. Whereas capacity is a dramatically smaller issue in software which can be copied at almost no cost. Essentially you get to copy/paste your country club MMORPG at very little cost, and while you may not make that much money from the low-end players, you make more than enough for it to be worth it.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Nothing is free to play, I wish they would change the name to free to download game, after that it will cost you cash.
What about the part where you can play for free?
There is no way in any F2P game you can keep going without at some point spending money to keep going. I mean sure you just go so far and then quit playing but if you really want to keep going at some point you will spend the cash.
They make tons of money by finding the whales, for sure. But if MMOs are the same as...say...most leisure activities, the next step is to build gated communities for just the whales (ie, an MMO version of a country club or a luxury casino). I mean, if these games live or die on the backs of a few whales and a bunch of free riders, why not just keep the whales?
Because it's software.
When someone builds a country club to capitalize on rich people, they have physical capacity limitations to limit access to their product. Whereas capacity is a dramatically smaller issue in software which can be copied at almost no cost. Essentially you get to copy/paste your country club MMORPG at very little cost, and while you may not make that much money from the low-end players, you make more than enough for it to be worth it.
Oh, I don't know. I've been to some of the private clubs here in Chicago (Union League, Alumni Club, etc.) One of the things they aren't hurting for is space. It seems to me that the reason for the dues isn't the lack of space; it's to:
1) Keep out people who don't or can't pay the dues.
2) Act as a kind of filter to ensure that a certain kind of person is joining.
3) Ensure a level of service that the clientele expects, above and beyond the typical service.
4) Ensure a quality space, filled with good art, good booze, good events etc.
Now I can imagine an MMO experience that replicates a private club experience, or a luxury casino resort experience, or a first class flight experience that would include the following things for a flat registration rate and monthly fees:
1) Near unlimited character customization options. Every aspect on sliders. Thousands of clothing options.
2) Live developer play; character actors that play things like NPCs and cameos of important folks from the lore.
3) A full on crafting experience where you can build anything, design anything and use what you create.
4) Sumptuous graphics.
5) Full on PvP, but PvP which isn't done for the typical BS ePeen reasons that the rabble does, since most of that rabble wouldn't even be allowed in because of the expense.
6) A roleplay environment like no other, with all sorts of character play opportunities.
Now would this be expensive to do? Yes, but I'm thinking that's not going to matter so much. Because the kind of person who would want this experience would be willing to pay more, and pay regularly, to get the best. And the reason I say this is because they already are paying for the best in nearly every other context, from hotels, to clubs, to airlines, to casinos and restaurants, to Warhammer 40K armies and niche gunpla garage kits..
Frankly, we were halfway there with this kind of concept with Second Life and Entropia Universe. But the problem with those things is that they, like today's MMO, started to reek of low class opportunism in the form of land sales and item sales. The last thing a sophisticated connoisseur wants is to get nickled and dimed by the people who boast about nickel and diming them. That's where they went wrong, and that's where the MMO market is going wrong now.
The MMO market right now is acting like some two-bit hustler, who likes to gloat how good he is at hustling naiive upper middle-class folks with more money than sense. And the reason I say this is because they do gloat--nearly every chance they get--about how much they are nickel and diming people.
It's part of the reason why I think those 'whales' that are putting down full Gs at the item store aren't as rich and sophisticated as we like to believe. Vice-addled, maybe. Bankruptcy teetering, perhaps. Unsophisticated status chasers, most probably, but if I were someone who was serious about gaming, with serious money to spend, the last thing I would want to do is blow it all in one of these traps we have today. I'd want better for my money; a better experience all around.
The true connoisseur doesn't want to be nickel and dimed; he wants it all, he wants every detail to be perfect, and he wants full amenities for one price. It can be a steep price, but if he's paying for the best experience, he'll pay it. But then you have to leave him alone to enjoy, without having to have him whip out his credit card every second.
I think there is a market for a super realistic, fully staffed and fully tailor made MMO experience for a $200 entry fee and $30 a month subscription...maybe even double that. But there can't be any item store. There can't be any 'carnival barkers' or nickel and diming. Anything that reminds them that there's a world out there hungry for their real life credit card that breaks their immersion is a dealbreaker. The deal is, rather, "All expenses paid, have fun!"
__________________________ "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it." --Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints." --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls." --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Comments
The way to beat free is to offer the things that it can not... such as exclusivity. Premium services fare well against free services, if they show that the buy in is being used as a gating mechanism. People value rarity, and this creates a market for those that can afford it.
But no, people don't have to have bought the game to see if it's a quality product. They can find out on the internet. Like from this site and YouTube and etc.
Once upon a time....
As for people getting information from third party sites, well as long as you think someone else opinion is as good as yours.... you would be correct. However, personal experience has shown to be a stronger influence than any second hand source.
You may believe that people can be convinced that X is better than Y... but when they have Y in hand, they tend not to believe it. This is a sales approach that has worked for thousands of years, and will likely continue in the future.
Internet opinions don't always work because everyone has different tastes. The internet hated Vanguard. I loved it. The internet said Tabula Rasa was crap. I loved it. The internet underrates indie niche games such as Ryzom, that have more depth in 10 minutes of gameplay than most games have in thousands of hours. I love it too. Most people would disagree with me, or maybe they might like one or two of the three. As I said, we all have different opinions.
Of course, that's not foolproof. But neither is playing a game until you've actually played it extensively.
But they can be part of what makes a product "quality". Or not, of course. But they can be what distinguishes a product, making it a "quality product".
Once upon a time....
So why is it that everyone wants to get in the exclusive club?
Because the cover charge acts as a good filter for the kind of person you'll see, and the kind of person you want to be.
Don't get me wrong. I can see why the publishers went free to play as a way to get those late adopters and luddites who are too squeamish about a paywall into online games. But by now, they ought to know that their image has been so eroded over time that they look like some hole for the vice addled and the basket cases, occupying a niche slightly more disrespectable than fantasy football and slightly more respectable than online poker.
The real gamers are buying to play, investing in preorders and paying $15 a month for Playstation Plus, just like they always do. They feel it is worth it, because the developers of said titles and subscription media made it worth something.
I can't believe that MMO publishers just don't seem to get this basic fact of brand valuation that has been verified over and over again. When you let anyone in without charge, you give out the impression that the thing is so bad, you can't even give it away. And, frankly, with the kind of overworked boring treadmill gameplay we get these days, it really is so bad that they can't give it away.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
F2P business strategy works like the concession stand at the ballpark, selling beers. You can make a lot of money when you have 35,000 patrons. If only 1% buy a beer, at $7.00 a bottle, that's $2500 of beer sold (and scaleable goods like apps are a whole lot more cost effective than non-scaleable goods like beers). We can say that the ballpark does most of the work for the beer seller, since it gives them a captive audience. It's the same dynamic that works for F2P writ large.
But I would say that MMOs, because of the cult-like devotion to them inherent in the MMO culture, attract a different kind of consumer, one that's more conspicuous and more similar to the club hopper than the guy who buys a beer in the 5th inning. To attract this kind of person, you need to build a scene that hits the right cues. Paywalls, I would argue, do not diminish the appeal of the kind of experience these people crave. If anything, it enhances it.
Again, I don't doubt that F2P makes a lot of revenue. Then again, the thread is about how to compete with free. Well, I would argue that the way you compete with free is the same way clubs with a cover charge compete with corner pubs who offer no cover charge: by offering a scene you can't get at the corner pub.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
Ask yourself ... can riotgames give away LoL? Given that tens of millions of players are playing that game every day ... i think the answer is "yes".
Well, if you cannot beat them, join them. How to compete with free .. isn't the answer obvious? Be free.
http://www.engadget.com/2014/10/23/league-of-legends-tops-mmo-revenue-list-hearthstone-no-10/
Here is the top 10 MMO money makers in 2014. One is sub-only .. that is WOW. Good luck for anyone tries to duplicate that.
Now no doubt someone can make a niche sub-only game and get like a few thousand players .. but we are talking about competing, not hiding and go for another market.
But the question is how to compete with f2p ... and I am just trying to answer it .. and one way is to be more like single player games. Those still sells. Clearly they are doing better (just look at D3, SC2, Dishonored and so on ...) than sub-only long term games.
You said "players will be willing to invest" ... you have data? I would say given the proliferation of f2p games, the demise (or close to demise) of sub-only games, players are NOT willing to "invest" in long term. They want quick, convenient entertainment, and they can change their minds quickly (look at how farmville thrived and then declined).
One of WoW's big success stories is their retention rate. In early years, it was 30%+/-. And that blew the rest of the industry away.
Yet, that's the common figure in all business models for success, so I wonder where the rest of the MMORPG industry has been. Well, not anywhere really, just Themepark clone design for the most part.
And that explains the lack of -good- data sources too.
Once upon a time....
However, this does not mean that single player games can not do well as free games. Look at mobile games such as candy crush. This is clearly a single player game that has benefited from the value of free. The reason that free helped so much is that the biggest issue with mobile games is discoverability. Making the game free allowed it to top the charts, and become more visible. This allowed them to gain the benefit of the free user outside of the game, in in the marketplace.
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE
When someone builds a country club to capitalize on rich people, they have physical capacity limitations to limit access to their product. Whereas capacity is a dramatically smaller issue in software which can be copied at almost no cost. Essentially you get to copy/paste your country club MMORPG at very little cost, and while you may not make that much money from the low-end players, you make more than enough for it to be worth it.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
1) Keep out people who don't or can't pay the dues.
2) Act as a kind of filter to ensure that a certain kind of person is joining.
3) Ensure a level of service that the clientele expects, above and beyond the typical service.
4) Ensure a quality space, filled with good art, good booze, good events etc.
Now I can imagine an MMO experience that replicates a private club experience, or a luxury casino resort experience, or a first class flight experience that would include the following things for a flat registration rate and monthly fees:
1) Near unlimited character customization options. Every aspect on sliders. Thousands of clothing options.
2) Live developer play; character actors that play things like NPCs and cameos of important folks from the lore.
3) A full on crafting experience where you can build anything, design anything and use what you create.
4) Sumptuous graphics.
5) Full on PvP, but PvP which isn't done for the typical BS ePeen reasons that the rabble does, since most of that rabble wouldn't even be allowed in because of the expense.
6) A roleplay environment like no other, with all sorts of character play opportunities.
Now would this be expensive to do? Yes, but I'm thinking that's not going to matter so much. Because the kind of person who would want this experience would be willing to pay more, and pay regularly, to get the best. And the reason I say this is because they already are paying for the best in nearly every other context, from hotels, to clubs, to airlines, to casinos and restaurants, to Warhammer 40K armies and niche gunpla garage kits..
Frankly, we were halfway there with this kind of concept with Second Life and Entropia Universe. But the problem with those things is that they, like today's MMO, started to reek of low class opportunism in the form of land sales and item sales. The last thing a sophisticated connoisseur wants is to get nickled and dimed by the people who boast about nickel and diming them. That's where they went wrong, and that's where the MMO market is going wrong now.
The MMO market right now is acting like some two-bit hustler, who likes to gloat how good he is at hustling naiive upper middle-class folks with more money than sense. And the reason I say this is because they do gloat--nearly every chance they get--about how much they are nickel and diming people.
It's part of the reason why I think those 'whales' that are putting down full Gs at the item store aren't as rich and sophisticated as we like to believe. Vice-addled, maybe. Bankruptcy teetering, perhaps. Unsophisticated status chasers, most probably, but if I were someone who was serious about gaming, with serious money to spend, the last thing I would want to do is blow it all in one of these traps we have today. I'd want better for my money; a better experience all around.
The true connoisseur doesn't want to be nickel and dimed; he wants it all, he wants every detail to be perfect, and he wants full amenities for one price. It can be a steep price, but if he's paying for the best experience, he'll pay it. But then you have to leave him alone to enjoy, without having to have him whip out his credit card every second.
I think there is a market for a super realistic, fully staffed and fully tailor made MMO experience for a $200 entry fee and $30 a month subscription...maybe even double that. But there can't be any item store. There can't be any 'carnival barkers' or nickel and diming. Anything that reminds them that there's a world out there hungry for their real life credit card that breaks their immersion is a dealbreaker. The deal is, rather, "All expenses paid, have fun!"
__________________________
"Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
--Arcken
"...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
--Hellmar, CEO of CCP.
"It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
--Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE