Howdy, Stranger!

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

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

General: Story of the Week: Subscriptions Losing to RMT

2

Comments

  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member

    Originally posted by BillMurphy

    This week's Story of the Week highlights a recent analysis from iHS and Screen Digest that details a dip in subscription revenue in favor of microtransactions. Does this herald the end of the monthly subscription?



    If you take into effect that several companies in the past year or so have dropped the subscription model in a last ditch effort to save their games, this can probably explain the 5% drop in subscription revenue the report details.  Meanwhile microtransaction totals have increased significantly (in the face of these changes), but what’s more interesting to note is that the cash-shop revenue has apparently increased the total revenue of the market.  This means more people are buying things from these item malls, and it’s enough to increase the overall market by nearly half a billion dollars.

    Read the rest of our Story of the Week: Subscriptions Losing to RMT.


    That sums it up very nice " A last ditch effort to save their games" Lets face it. Former MMO's that recently went to F2P were popular games all ready and if it was not for the recent economy taking a nose dive I am sure that games like lotro and Cox would still be P2P that is why even WoW had to offer some kind of F2P zone if you will along with lotro and Cox after all you still have the option of subbing if you so choose to continue your gaming experience.

    That brings me to another point all of these EASTERN games coming out by the truck load are just looking for a quick buck and do not care if the game last or not. I would not spend my valuable time or money in buying virtual armor from the games shop in some half ass MMO that is advertise on the Cartoon Network.

    Conclusion is that Real gamers will not mind spending money on a game that is well devolved and gives them a MMO experience that they not only get hooked on but drool at night dreaming about.

    image

  • OtakunOtakun New Providence, PAPosts: 864Member

    Originally posted by Aeolron

    People who say that they paid say 50-60 bucks for a mmo then believe they shouldn't have to pay $15 per month because for the sole purpose for owning the boxed game itself should look at , for example, subscribing to Internet services, cell phones , tv ect , it's a service and based on that service can and will be cut off if people don't pay the monthly sub. I can understand that $15 a month might seem alittle pricey for some folks, but for the rest of us who have been playing mmos for alittle over a decade and paying a sub fee, FTP with a item mall just doesn't cut it. When I see FTP I see a cheap product and Also makes me wonder how well their game is doing financially. Just my thoughts.

    Internet and cellphones do mutliple functions and give a lot more entertainment then just 1 MMO.

    Also, any decent F2P makes more money then a P2P. This has been known for quite sometime, just look at Nexon. People will say that Maplestory and Vindictus sucks but they are still running and make a lot more money then any post WoW P2P.  F2P doesn't always mean cheap product, but at least you can try the game for free unlike a P2P MMO where you have to pay 50+ box fee just to play it unless your friend lets you play which is technically against the EULA.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,908Member Uncommon

    If people think it's more expensive to play F2p now, just wait until it beats out the sub model completely. Right now people have other options, if that were to change, prices would sky rocket, as the F2p no longer would have sub models to contend with. WHich IMO means an even bigger push for sales, and need to buy items.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • AeolronAeolron Ottawa, ONPosts: 648Member
    Internet and phone offer only 1 service either it be phone or Internet. My ISP provides me with Internet nothing more, where as a mmo , PTP is offering a service of playing that game. I don't know what kind of Internet or phone service you have, but mine just provides 1 service each.
  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member

    Originally posted by Distopia

    If people think it's more expensive to play F2p now, just wait until it beats out the sub model completely. Right now people have other options, if that were to change, prices would sky rocket, as the F2p no longer woul have sub models to contend with. WHich IMO means an even bigger push for sales, and need to buy items.

    I don't think we will not see the end of Sub games for awhile. With that in mind I only hope that Up coming Sub games like TOR will not only cut a chunk out of the MMO pie but hold on to it for a long time to come.

    image

  • AzothAzoth montreal, QCPosts: 720Member Uncommon

    Anyone crying over a 15$ sub for what can easily be a 40hours+ of entertainement per month loose all credibility in my book. Sure the latest p2p game were crap, but they were still worth 15$. What is 15$ to you ?

    I always end up paying a lot more money for f2p game and usually get tired of em faster. What we need is a true gem and constant update. Then the sub would be better accepted.  

  • ElGormoElGormo New MiltonPosts: 1Member

    Online casinos have been exposed for allowing money laundering through their systems, I do wonder if something similar is going on here with Cash Shops in FTP titles.

    I wish the industry would buck their ideas up, I would happily pay £25-30 a month to pay a game which I can be truly submersed in, but as others hve mentioned the games out there now just don't warrant this level of investment from the playerbase.

    The subscription model is failing because the games being released are simply not worth subscribing to, and the developers know that.

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,209Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Khrymson

    Originally posted by MMOrUS



    Play Lotro with a sub and you get acess to the entire game, play Lotro free and you have to purchase access to content, add that content up and BAM you just ended up paying the equivalent of 3 months sub, yet you think your better off because your not tied to a monthly sub. It's a false saving and players are lulled into thinking they are saving money this way, add it up at the end of your playing life and I'l bet you've spent 50% more than you should have.

     

    Although, when you look at this from a casual player's point of view, it may take us as many as 6 months or longer  to reach the cap, instead of only 1-3mo that a more regular player will make the trek in.

     

    I'm basing this loosly on the lvl 1-60 trek over a 3-6mo period:



    • If you pay monthly, the cost depends on the sub you pay for.  3mo straight up is $30, or if you pay month to month that would be $45.  And thats it, you get 3 months of unrestricted access.  And after your time expires, if you choose to play as a free player, all your previous quest content is suddenly locked out.  You've already completed it all on your main char, but what if you want to start a new char?   You either have to subscribe again or pay for each quest pack.   Both of which could cost you another $30~$45+  So far we're up to $60~$90!  


     


    • If you pay for LOTRO entirely through the F2P/cash shop method, sure it'll probably add up to $45+ to unlock all the quest content as we play through it.  And over that period of 6+ months, we can come and go at anytime, without the thought of a clock ticking down until we can't play anymore without paying again.  And even if we take a break for a year, what we paid for is still unlocked, even if we start a new char.  


     


    So ultimately a F2P player has only paid $45 at this point, where as the subscriber has paid as much as $60-$90.

     

    It's not that black and white.  If you subscribe for 3 months (a $30 package) you get a stipend of 1500TP total to spend which could be put towards quest packs once you drop back down to Premium.

    In addition to that there are a lot of features that can be unlocked for a character or account while subscribed that remain unlocked when dropping down to Premium (riding skills, crafting guild reputation, fast travel destinations, and more).  These would all cost a Premium player a lot of TP, especially on multiple characters.

    There is a strategy to playing that game to maximize feature access without wasting money.  Playing Premium with the occasional VIP subscription stint makes a lot of sense which brings me to my main point.

    The game play experience in LotRO is nowhere near the quality of a P2P game, such as RIFT, now.  The entire game is developed around purchasing items in the store.  The best potions are store exclusives, LI relic removal is a store exclusive, in combat run speed buffs - exclusive, multiple map destinations, cooldown reductions, and much more - all store exclusives.  Yeah you can earn them through Turbine's "fun" transitive gaming property by grinding out TP.  But the bottom line is that LotRO players have asked for those features to be included in the game, and they were -- in the store after F2P.  Contrast that with RIFT where features are added to the game and I earn access to them via game play.  It is like night to day.

    On the other hand, I agree with Z3RO1:  P2P is just renting the game you buy and it doesn't always feel good.  It's not like you can drop one day, stop paying, and a week later play for a few days and pay, then drop again.  Feeling like I'm renting a game leaves a poor taste in my mouth and gives that pushy feeling like I have to play to get my money's worth even when I don't actually feel like playing.

    I'm very much hoping that Arena Net's B2P model with some micro-transactions takes hold.  For me it has the potential to be the least inconvenient and the lesser gouge to my wallet.  On one hand I don't want to feel locked into playing because the money clock is constantly ticking (P2P) but on the other hand I don't want to be nickled and dimed for a store-centric gameplay experience (F2P).  B2P seems to be a reasonable middle ground to these two extremes.

  • DracondisDracondis Reston, VAPosts: 176Member

    Originally posted by Khrymson

    If more developers would follow what is said in this video from Extra Credits: Microtransactions, I believe it would be more widely accepted as being fair instead of how most perceive it as gouging the consumers for every nickle and dime we have...

    If more game companies followed the advice given by Extra Credits in general, the overall market would be vastly improved.

  • crazynannycrazynanny PopowoPosts: 173Member

    The whole freemium MMOs aren't that fine and dandy like many people say. LOTRO is perfect example of game where Turbine double dips(sub + cash shop) most loyal players. So yeah You get worse of two worlds this way.

    Free players just have cash shop and if You are smart it can be okay in longer run. But in short term, after completing free parts(akin to WoW free trial) of the game You have to fork up quite some cash or suffer the grind taken from worst korean MMOs.

    In the end sad reality is the best game experience in LOTRO You'll obtain by paying sub AND using cash shop. Which leads to another problem aka designing content to promote cash shop purchases. And I wish this cash shop had only fluff like WoW one...

    So yeah in theory freemium model is perfect as You either pay as You go(via cash shop) or pay sub and don't care. In reality it's just a way to put cash shop in sub based game. As long as You don't sub it's okay, but when You do, You get the worst deal.

  • UnsungTooUnsungToo Lake Worthless, FLPosts: 276Member

    They make enough money either way, I don't care. You either make your game accessible or get fat starving by eating all the wrong foods.

    Godspeed my fellow gamer

  • Games that are actually worth a subscription will get the customers.  I don't think it's long until we have game with a subscription and a real money auction house / currency exchange. 

  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko RotterdamPosts: 3,845Member Uncommon

    I believe that ingame cash shops will become "standard features" in all MMO's. Heck, they will even become part of single-player games (via an online connection). The introduction of DLC-packs is just the start.

    The lure of increased revenue is simply too attractive for any game company to pass up. Subscription-based games have been unable to break through the "$15 per month" glass ceiling. No company wants to be the first to raise their monthly sub, because players will revolt and they would lose subs/players to other competitors still charging the "standard fee".

    Cash shops bypass this artificial barrier nicely. I strongly doubt that the average player keeps a detailed record of their ingame purchases. This means that its quite likely that players will end up spending more in a game over the period of a year than they would have spent on a subscription model, especially as the cash shop purchases are often small amounts spread over a long period of time.

    As time passes, people will become "de-sensitized" to cash shops, because no amount of forum-wailing will make them go away. Once that happens (a year or 2 from now), game companies will become more "creative" in their use of cash shops. Many will go too far, too fast, and will crash and burn, but the overall trend will increase, of that I've no doubt.

    The F2P model may well be cheaper than subscription IF you only ever have 1 character in the game, and resist the temptation to use too many consumables (potions, XP-boosts, etc.) from the shop.

    However, as a serial-altaholic, subscription play offers me the best value for money by far. I generally have 3 to 4 characters in any game I play, and it would cost me a heap of money to run those characters in most F2P games. I also tend to pay my subs in 6 or 12 month blocs, which almost always reduces the per month cost. I've NEVER paid $15 per month to play an MMO.

  • UnlightUnlight Ottawa, ONPosts: 2,540Member

    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    <snip>

    However, as a serial-altaholic, subscription play offers me the best value for money by far. I generally have 3 to 4 characters in any game I play, and it would cost me a heap of money to run those characters in most F2P games. I also tend to pay my subs in 6 or 12 month blocs, which almost always reduces the per month cost. I've NEVER paid $15 per month to play an MMO.

    You should be ashamed to call yourself a serial altaholic with only three or four characters in your games.  Come back when you find it's necessary to be in the double digits. :P

    There's only really two free-ish games that I'm familiar with, DDO and Guild Wars.  DDO starts you off with 2 slots for completely free accounts, and gives you four if you become a premium member, which only requires buying a point package in the store at any time.  The Premium designation is permanent after that.  But two isn't that far off from three or four, and the cost of those two slots can be obtained pretty easily just from playing.

    GW gives you four for the base game (Prophesies), and another two for each of the additional campaigns (Factions and Nightfall) for a possible total of eight.  Pretty decent, even for altaholics.  Incidentally, I still needed another three.

    So anyway, I'll assume that not all F2P games are as generous.  But that just tells me that most shops aren't ones that I want to use.  If people stop playing games with lousy shops and stick to those that they can at least tolerate, it will change the model for RMT for the entire genre in time.  They are here to stay, but we as gamers should try to control how they are implemented by being selective in the games we choose to play.

    Personally, I'm still open to paying for a subscription for the right game.  But it would have to be something pretty damned stellar.  I no longer believe that the monthly charge is needed to keep a game going.  I'm more convinced than ever that they are only doing it because they can.  And when I decide which games I will play in the future, there is one new factor I'm considering in my decision and that's the payment model.  It was never something I looked at before because they were pretty much all the same, but choice exists now and I intend to exercise my ability make one.  And I doubt I'm the only one who feels that way.

  • stragen001stragen001 ReadingPosts: 1,720Member

    IMO the reason for the fall in subscription revenues is that people are just not willing to pay a subscription for old out of date games, or new incomplete ones. This is why a lot of games have gone F2P with MT.

    Because the games now have a higher population (no barrier to entry(subscription)) there is a higher percentage of people willing to spend a little in the cash shop....since they arent paying a subscription.

    I think a lot of people are playing these F2P games as a filler until SWTOR or GW2 comes out. Once this happens I think the amount people will spend on Microtransactions will dramatically decrease as they will switch to these games, which are P2P and B2P respectively.

     



     

    Cluck Cluck, Gibber Gibber, My Old Mans A Mushroom

  • OzmodanOzmodan Hilliard, OHPosts: 7,187Member Uncommon

    There are a lot of very mediocre f2p titles with little content, but lots of grind, coming out of China and Korea.  Obviously a lot of new players are getting into MMO's.  

    I will laugh at anyone trying to tell me a big budget MMO is going to f2p because I want to know who is foolish enough to invest in a title that can't show a revenue stream.  Subscriptions show revenue stream, a f2p game is a fling in the dark.  

    Yes, the f2p titles will probably show more income which should be expected considering there are about 10 times as many of them.  The issue is how are the subscription games with a f2p option lumped in, because I would be willing to bet games like Lotro still make far more subscription revenue than f2p.

  • xxantiheroxxxxantiheroxx Wichita, KSPosts: 68Member Uncommon

    The Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 model will be the best, IMO. You buy the box and all the content from that is playable in full without ever having to pay another cent. But you can also purchase cosmetic items and such from the shop if you're really invested in the game.

     

    And then, when they add new content, you have the option of paying for that if you want or not. It creates more incentive for the developers to put out content the players actually want, rather than the content they want the players to have. If they put out content nobody asked for or really wants, they don't get paid.

     

    Personally, I think this model is the future of MMOs. The current 15/month subscription model is outdated. There are a lot more casual gamers than there are hardcore gamers, and which model do you think casual players will be more inclined to go with when they know they'll only be playing maybe a couple hours a day if that? They'll go with the one that they can buy once and never have to pay another cent to play the content or have to worry about playing as much as they possibly can to "get their money's worth".

  • dotdotdashdotdotdash Llandrindod WellsPosts: 364Member

    Some people on this site baffle me in a way I cannot describe. It's a level of ignorance I have not seen in a gaming community before.

    Firstly people need to use their heads here. Many of you are attributing the success of the F2P RMT model to the conversions of games such as LotRo, Champions, DnD etc. The reality is that whilst these games certainly did lend a great deal to the growth of RMT, they are not single handedly responsible for said growth. In the last major analysis RMT was only just lagging behind subs and - given organic growth (minus conversions) - it was widely expected that the RMT market would overtake the subscription market anyway. The conversions may have helped that happen sooner and more decisively, but they weren't required for it to happen.

    Now let's look at the claims of exploitation in the F2P genre. In realty this is a false claim 90% of the time. If we look at the major players in the F2P arena, namely Runes of Magic, Allods Online, LortRo and Age of Conan you will see a commonality of principle which is that items should not act as keys to entry but perks to entry. They may speed up your progression towards the end goal but you are most certainly not prevented from getting to that end goal if you do not have them. Now before you get on your soap box and start lecturing me about how AoC and LotrO charge for content at inflated prices, realise one thing: with a subscription you get access to all areas and all items without having to spend cash however if you stop subscribing you lose most of thos benefits. As an F2P player in AoC or LotRo you are barred from very few items and when you do purchase content it is yours to keep forever. In the long run the F2P player actually spends less cash for more content than the sub player. That's not a random aspersion but fact based on the numbers involved. There are a few MMOs out there that use exploitative models but these are mostly old MMOs that have been around for years. In todays F2P space we're talking about some insanely high quality MMOs coming through the pipe line.

    And just for lolz, and to defy the notion that the F2P model is only used when attempting to save a dying MMO in the west: The Torchlight MMO will be F2P. End of Nations is F2P. LoL and HoN are F2P. Tribes Ascend is F2P. The new Warhammer MOBA is F2P. Guild Wars 2 is B2P. CCP have stated that Dust 514 will be F2P at some point in the future. Blizzard have implied that Titan will be F2P. In fact the F2P model has been so successful at creating a healthy, vibrant and competetive market that more innovation is happening in that arena than is ever likely to happen in the sub arena ever again.

    In short any progress made in the F2P RT market is progress in aid of you - as gamers - as the F2P model has the potential - which is already being realised - to be far more accessible and fair than the sub model ever has or will be. It allows choice far exceeding the sub model, and allows you a spectrum of decisions to make. YOU decide what you want to spend your money on, rather than being told to spend your money regardless of whether the content is good or not.

  • jeremyjodesjeremyjodes antioch, ORPosts: 679Member

    lets face it. economy's down the crapper this was going to happen. game company's padding the coffers encase it goes down that crapper.I feel that if a game is dying, let it die. it's natural selection from a gamers standpoint. RMT is life support for that dying game. The game was probably mediocre to start with and the Dev's never intended for it to be a long lasting beloved game like world of Warcraft is was.

    The answer to all of this is, stop feeding these company's more then you would pay for a monthly sub. revolt when they add the item store and start having some balls if you want the future to have more quality games and not just a ton of free games that in the end nickel and dime your ass to death.



    Us Americans need to start organizing on shit like this. so many of you could careless and enjoy playing free until you hit the pay for this feature to continue quest line then your off to the next free to play. we let this be imported from Asia and we need to say fuck no to it or we are totally screwed for any quality games in the future.

     

     

     

    image

  • PukeBucketPukeBucket Beaverton, ORPosts: 867Member

    Originally posted by jeremyjodes

    lets face it. economy's down the crapper this was going to happen. game company's padding the coffers encase it goes down that crapper.I feel that if a game is dying, let it die. it's natural selection from a gamers standpoint. RMT is life support for that dying game. The game was probably mediocre to start with and the Dev's never intended for it to be a long lasting beloved game like world of Warcraft is was.

    The answer to all of this is, stop feeding these company's more then you would pay for a monthly sub. revolt when they add the item store and start having some balls if you want the future to have more quality games and not just a ton of free games that in the end nickel and dime your ass to death.



    Us Americans need to start organizing on shit like this. so many of you could careless and enjoy playing free until you hit the pay for this feature to continue quest line then your off to the next free to play. we let this be imported from Asia and we need to say fuck no to it or we are totally screwed for any quality games in the future.

     

     

     

    That's how most people do it actually. Most of the f2p community I deal with in LotRO anyway. I've picked up 20 bucks worth of points 3 times over the last year. I'm able to level from 1 to the soon to be cap of 75 without a hitch. There's some portions of the game I'm not able to access; I probaby wouldn't have anyway.

    It's the most sane model and makes the games more accessable to people.

    Monthly fees are like throwing money away.

    I used to play MMOs like you, but then I took an arrow to the knee.

  • shinobi234shinobi234 Bronx, NYPosts: 437Member

    Originally posted by xxantiheroxx

    The Guild Wars and Guild Wars 2 model will be the best, IMO. You buy the box and all the content from that is playable in full without ever having to pay another cent. But you can also purchase cosmetic items and such from the shop if you're really invested in the game.

     

    And then, when they add new content, you have the option of paying for that if you want or not. It creates more incentive for the developers to put out content the players actually want, rather than the content they want the players to have. If they put out content nobody asked for or really wants, they don't get paid.

     

    Personally, I think this model is the future of MMOs. The current 15/month subscription model is outdated. There are a lot more casual gamers than there are hardcore gamers, and which model do you think casual players will be more inclined to go with when they know they'll only be playing maybe a couple hours a day if that? They'll go with the one that they can buy once and never have to pay another cent to play the content or have to worry about playing as much as they possibly can to "get their money's worth".

    yep i agree but pay to play models and hyprids will always be around no matter what you say. they will always sneak a pay to play method in there saying oh you have to pay to acces this, Before guild wars came out Asia had free to play first. So they copyed off Asia games free to play and made it just like theres I know some games you buy stuff for fluffy and all that. Not every company will will go free to play sure guild wars has good system i know some games have the same system free to play and buy nothing. This is not the only company i seen have this so its not new ^_^. As i said they will always be hyrpid free to play or pay to play i dont mind really nor do i care paying 15 bucks a month its only 15 bucks. my cable bill is 126 and you think i am going to complain about 15 bucks O_O. I also payed 30 bucks a month for 2 accounts on everquest 2 you think i wine and said i dont like it i want free to play. No i dont care really hey the world revolves around money even the rich people dive in it and greed is along way.

    .....

  • VesaviusVesavius BristolPosts: 7,643Member Uncommon

    Originally posted by Lasterba

    I wonder how much iHS and MMORPG.com got paid to write this "report". It is an instrinsically flawed pile of garbage. Number of subscription games = x. Number of RMT games = x*1000.



    Surprised that RMT makes more money? Not me.

     

    Just part of the social engineering that we have seen take place across the net the past few years in the effort to shape opinion, create the false reality of 'it's inevitable so don't fight it', and normalise the practise.

    I see so many shill pieces across so many 'neutral' gaming sites, all not declaring their relationships and shared interests, however how behind the scenes, with the F2P providers.

    Governments should be taking note of whats gone on in this space over this issue... it's been incredible to watch how the masses have been led by paid opinion formers (both in the guise of forum shills and information sites) into something thats fundamentally bad for them and games in general.

    It's already reached the point where the very users that the system exploits fight to defend it on behalf of the corperations :/

     

     

     

    "That system is our enemy. But when you're inside, you look around, what do you see? Businessmen, teachers, lawyers, carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system, and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will fight to protect it. "

     

  • RinnaRinna Las Vegas, NVPosts: 388Member

    The only reason the numbers show sub prices are down is because THERE ARE NO NEW SUB GAMES OUT RIGHT NOW.  Check the numbers after SWTOR, Secret World, TERA, Diablo 3 and Wildstar come out and I'm sure you'll see different numbers.  I totally declare and agree these numbers are skewed and the conductor of this survey is an asshat.

    No bitchers.

  • shinobi234shinobi234 Bronx, NYPosts: 437Member

    Originally posted by MMOtoGO

    It's hard to say considering there are several games that would have been in the "subscription" category that are now micro-transaction games.  The industry, to a degree, moved this way to give more games a shot at getting played on a more regular basis.  People won't maintain several subs but they will play several games.  

    The subscription model is going away, IMHO.  This trend may be sped up once GW2 releases and people judge this game, which is B2P and has no sub fee.  If a game can prove that quality can be maintained without a sub and that a cash shop doesn't mean Pay to Win, I think the sub model will fade.  

    If some game's cash shops weren't so terrible, I don't think some gamers would mind quite as much.




     

    i kinda disagree with pay to play going away there are still people spending there money on pay to play . And not every one likes guild wars look at everquest 2 or some other games out there that like to spend that 15 bucks a month .. so i dont think its going to fade its just the way it works every one out there money hungry for our wallets ^_^

    .....

  • AmarantharAmaranthar OhioPosts: 2,428Member Uncommon



    Originally posted by dotdotdash

    Some people on this site baffle me in a way I cannot describe. It's a level of ignorance I have not seen in a gaming community before.

    Firstly people need to use their heads here. Many of you are attributing the success of the F2P RMT model to the conversions of games such as LotRo, Champions, DnD etc. The reality is that whilst these games certainly did lend a great deal to the growth of RMT, they are not single handedly responsible for said growth. In the last major analysis RMT was only just lagging behind subs and - given organic growth (minus conversions) - it was widely expected that the RMT market would overtake the subscription market anyway. The conversions may have helped that happen sooner and more decisively, but they weren't required for it to happen.

    Now let's look at the claims of exploitation in the F2P genre. In realty this is a false claim 90% of the time. If we look at the major players in the F2P arena, namely Runes of Magic, Allods Online, LortRo and Age of Conan you will see a commonality of principle which is that items should not act as keys to entry but perks to entry. They may speed up your progression towards the end goal but you are most certainly not prevented from getting to that end goal if you do not have them. Now before you get on your soap box and start lecturing me about how AoC and LotrO charge for content at inflated prices, realise one thing: with a subscription you get access to all areas and all items without having to spend cash however if you stop subscribing you lose most of thos benefits. As an F2P player in AoC or LotRo you are barred from very few items and when you do purchase content it is yours to keep forever. In the long run the F2P player actually spends less cash for more content than the sub player. That's not a random aspersion but fact based on the numbers involved. There are a few MMOs out there that use exploitative models but these are mostly old MMOs that have been around for years. In todays F2P space we're talking about some insanely high quality MMOs coming through the pipe line.

    And just for lolz, and to defy the notion that the F2P model is only used when attempting to save a dying MMO in the west: The Torchlight MMO will be F2P. End of Nations is F2P. LoL and HoN are F2P. Tribes Ascend is F2P. The new Warhammer MOBA is F2P. Guild Wars 2 is B2P. CCP have stated that Dust 514 will be F2P at some point in the future. Blizzard have implied that Titan will be F2P. In fact the F2P model has been so successful at creating a healthy, vibrant and competetive market that more innovation is happening in that arena than is ever likely to happen in the sub arena ever again.

    In short any progress made in the F2P RT market is progress in aid of you - as gamers - as the F2P model has the potential - which is already being realised - to be far more accessible and fair than the sub model ever has or will be. It allows choice far exceeding the sub model, and allows you a spectrum of decisions to make. YOU decide what you want to spend your money on, rather than being told to spend your money regardless of whether the content is good or not.






     

    Jeeze, with all those FtP games, you'd think they'd at least double profits from the Subscription models.

    I'd like to point out that they make the comment: "but what’s more interesting to note is that the cash-shop revenue has apparently increased the total revenue of the market.  This means more people are buying things from these item malls, and it’s enough to increase the overall market by nearly half a billion dollars."

    But what's the outcome per game? With so many new entries, I'm guessing that it's dropping considerably.

    And still no reports on how Lotro and DDO are doing since they initially made the shift. They reported vastly increased revenues, which are not profits. No bragging since. And their message boards are very active.

    Once again, it all sounds like a con game, done to get buyers excited and promote the failure, and done by those who are selling the failure.

    Are we really supposed to be this dumb?





    But I'm not surprised that the sub model isn't doing well either. Same ol' same ol' doesn't get anyone excited. This industry is in decline, I have no doubts.

    Once upon a time....

2
Sign In or Register to comment.