I don't understand why it has to be one way or another. MMOs are not all the same qaulity, so why should they all cost the same price? I have no problem with f2p, b2p, freemium games existing. But i think the sub model could also advance past $14.99- I would be willing to pay a lot more than that a month for the kind of MMO experience I'm looking for.
The idea that because some games are b2p or f2p they all will be seems strange to me, as does the constant downward trend in service and value of the games released. It doesn't work this way in the rest of our society- for example, just because you can buy cheap clothes at walmart or eat cheap at mcdonalds doesn't mean we all want to. There are plenty of gamers with money to spend who I think would be willing to pay more to get more just like I would.
LOL ... F2P is having fun without paying. It is someone else is subsidizing my gaming. I don't see a problem. If it is not fun, don't play it.
If it is fun, and free, why shouldn't i play?
True, although that is why CoH shut down. Too many people figured someone else was supporting the game while they played for free and the company didn't make enough money.
That is the ultimate problem with F2P because the companies have to make sure enough people will pay. To do that they typically have to start putting more and more necessary elements in the store so more and more people pay. I do think that the EvE/Puzzle Pirates/now GW2 approach to a store where you let them buy a currency they can trade to others is a good alternate approach. It allows people with money to essentially buy items from other players with real world money. Then those cheap people can get a subscription for free in something like EvE and Puzzle Pirates buy trading for credits. Or get stuff from the store for free in something like GW2. Of course my only problem with GW2 is they charged a box price AND have a store which is kind of messed up.
LOL ... F2P is having fun without paying. It is someone else is subsidizing my gaming. I don't see a problem. If it is not fun, don't play it.
If it is fun, and free, why shouldn't i play?
True, although that is why CoH shut down. Too many people figured someone else was supporting the game while they played for free and the company didn't make enough money.
COH is an old game. More and more games (Rift, TOR, Marvel Heroes ...) are going F2P. Surely i can't say all will succeed, but with so many to play, i really don't mind if a few shut down. I don't see I will run out of free MMos to play anytime soon.
That is the ultimate problem with F2P because the companies have to make sure enough people will pay. To do that they typically have to start putting more and more necessary elements in the store so more and more people pay. I do think that the EvE/Puzzle Pirates/now GW2 approach to a store where you let them buy a currency they can trade to others is a good alternate approach. It allows people with money to essentially buy items from other players with real world money. Then those cheap people can get a subscription for free in something like EvE and Puzzle Pirates buy trading for credits. Or get stuff from the store for free in something like GW2. Of course my only problem with GW2 is they charged a box price AND have a store which is kind of messed up.
No .. they don't need more and more people pay. They just need the whales to pay more and more, which is fine with me. I don't really care if some poor soul desires to spend $5000 on a sword, if that subsidize my game.
And yes, i am all for RMT between players. D3 has done that and it works. I have a positive balance on it and cannot be happier. And yes, i do pump back what i earn to the game, the amount of money involves is small, but it is a thrill to sell a virtual sword for $15. And i don't have to worry about gold inflation.
I don't understand why it has to be one way or another. MMOs are not all the same qaulity, so why should they all cost the same price? I have no problem with f2p, b2p, freemium games existing. But i think the sub model could also advance past $14.99- I would be willing to pay a lot more than that a month for the kind of MMO experience I'm looking for.
The idea that because some games are b2p or f2p they all will be seems strange to me, as does the constant downward trend in service and value of the games released. It doesn't work this way in the rest of our society- for example, just because you can buy cheap clothes at walmart or eat cheap at mcdonalds doesn't mean we all want to. There are plenty of gamers with money to spend who I think would be willing to pay more to get more just like I would.
Since you have so much money to spare just pay for our subs while you're at it! Oops, that is the f2p concept.
I think the problem is that a group of individuals wanted to play a high quality mmo without paying a monthly sub, prob because their parents didnt want to pay for it. Then when it was delivered, the company realized that they were making no money, thus the item shop. Then the company realized that they were making a killing off of people who want to get to the so called "end game content" quick, so they make it so that you have to spend $30+ to get what you want quicker. And the companys just mimic each other and poof it offically costs more to enjoy yourself to the fullest in a F2P than a subscription game. This may not have been exactly what happened, but im sure its close.
I agree with the original poster, F2P is a scam, and your crazy if you dont think it is. But it is us the players that made that scam a reality...
I think the problem is that a group of individuals wanted to play a high quality mmo without paying a monthly sub, prob because their parents didnt want to pay for it. Then when it was delivered, the company realized that they were making no money, thus the item shop. Then the company realized that they were making a killing off of people who want to get to the so called "end game content" quick, so they make it so that you have to spend $30+ to get what you want quicker. And the companys just mimic each other and poof it offically costs more to enjoy yourself to the fullest in a F2P than a subscription game. This may not have been exactly what happened, but im sure its close.
I agree with the original poster, F2P is a scam, and your crazy if you dont think it is. But it is us the players that made that scam a reality...
Fair enough. Personally, I've never comprehended this odd gamer's willingness to simply settle for less for more (which is clearly reality if one desires to enjoy the entirety of a game).
"F2P" is a voracious virus that video gaming has contracted. Hopefully it just runs it's course and takes down as few titles as possible in the process. Disposable games and disposable gamers are not an ideal concoction.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Nowhere in the OP do you bring up specific games or examples. Best to use facts instead of feelings when making statements like this. That said few people actually think f2p games are some sort of benevolent charity rather than a business model created with the intent of making money.
The original poster (like most of those that feel that F2P is some sort of scam) was doubtless originally a traditional subscriber that saw their MMO go either partially or completely F2P and is upset at what the poster sees as a *cheapening* of the experience. It's an opinion - however, it has to be taken with a grain of salt the size of the Ross Ice Shelf. Why? Because like all opinions, it is *subjective* and not generally debatable on its merits.
Let's look at recent (relatively speaking) F2P conversion DCUO. Since the conversion, they have added (not subtracted) content - both paid and otherwise. They have added three DLC packs (Lightning Strikes, The Last Laugh, and Battle for Earth), and will add a third (Hand of Fate) within the month. They have gotten me to do something that even the original Guild Wars could never do - purchase DLC. (I purchased both Lightning Strikes *and* Battle for Earth - and I'm normally so NOT a DLC purchaser - for any game.) Since I made that purchase, they have added three game updates (the last - Game Update 18 - cleans up an imbalance created by two previous updates and a DLC pack - oddly enough, it was the PvP-targeted "The Last Laugh" DLC that really messed things up). MMORPGs generally do not have an *endgame* - unlike any traditional RPG. That "in and of itself" means that adding additional content has to be a consideration. DLC packs can highlight either a character/characters, power sets, types, of play, or mutiple of these at once. ("Battle for Earth" is a multifaceted DLC pack - it highlights the new set of Earth Powers, and it further fleshes out the main storyline for the core game itself - metahumanity vs. the sociopathic AI that is Brainiac.)
Now we come down to what convinced me to "break my own rule" and purchase DLC (and "Battle for Earth" in particular) - it was the story/plot.
In order to convince a player to purchase add-ons, the publisher/developer has to convince players that the DLC is an essential add-on to advance the plot. (Remember - the core of the plot of DCUO from the jump is to take down Brainiac - permanently. Both heroes and villains have a vested interest in this - even Lex Luthor - in all his seeming single-mindedness to take down Superman - hasn't forgotten this rather significant motive.) What was the linchpin - and the motive for me? It was a level 30 mission against Luthor - inside no less than the Hall of Doom itself - to rescue Superman. There was the reality that I specifically OWE Future Lex for my character being what he is today; he pilfered collected exobytes from Future Brainiac that enabled my metahumanity. However, I no more wanted Brainiac to win than I wanted Lex to win. That meant that I had to go through Lex to be in a position to satisfy my own "mission" - stopping Brainiac. And , therefore, if I wanted to be in on the end of Brainiac, I needed the "Battle for Earth" DLC. Everything else - and I mean exactly that - was secondary. The developer/publisher did their job - they made the purchase necessary. However, they also made the purchase rather easy - it's a one-time cost of a mere $10 (at regular price - they had been running a DLC sale which cut that price in half) - hence, that bite was far easier to swallow compared to typical pricing for DLC for a game, even an MMO.
Another thing about "Battle for Earth" is that it exposes many subplots within the entire game.
1. Wonder Woman vs. Circe.
2. The conflicted postion of Aquaman and Atlantis in terms of "drylanders"
3. How things aren't exactly hunky-dory within the Legion of Doom.
4. Some rather surprising machinations from what are arguably "villain" characters (Two-Face, Riddler/Edward Nygma, and even Catwoman, let alone the rather UNsurprising motivation behind Black Adam).
"Battle" covers all of it - and then some - for a surprisingly cheap $10.
The difference (for me, as opposed to the OP) is that I came in post-F2P - which made the sale surprisingly easy. (I willingly admit, that had I been in the OP's position, I would be feeling rather frustrated over a non-Legendary member (I'm a Premium member, and was prior to purchasing the DLC) have access to content to which I would be entitled *as* a Legendary member (that didn't change for the simple reason that Legendary/traditional membership didn't go away) - and therein lies the difference. In order for the Legendary member to get his content, the developer/publisher needed additional revenue to cover development costs OF that content. Hence the need to make it available outside the original *field of membership*. However, I've been where the OP is - and thus can understand why the developer/publisher would make that maneuver. However much we wish that they didn't have to, they, unfortunately for us, DID have to, for reasons of economics.)
Free to play is nothing more than a business revenue generator......
Thats all good if it provided for the consumer more immersion, new aspects to gaming, improved AI, mixing more RTS/FPS/RPG elements into one combined expierence, better quality games, polished, less bugs better graphics...ect
With improved technology we should expierence more for what we currently pay for, yet with F2P and those who participate in it, promote the garbage we see, we should see something more closely to Moore's Law (not pricisely, but not 10 year ago tech games with new skins)
With current software we get the same games that took lets say 100 people to make over thousands of manhours to complete in 2003. To games of the same quality in 2012 that takes 25 people to make with a few hundred manhours to finish (partially) coupled with F2P revenue................means you pay more, for the same, well really in the end with less.....lets play math.............
Of cource those who view the free market as a less of an idea and more an absolute religon would state that the F2P is the result of the consumer who is the one promoting its propagation (I mean a crew that is in mutiny, is never the fault of the capitan of ship who is %100 repsonsible for the actions of his crew unless captian disagress with it, or the CEO that dishes out garbage and does not provide any alternatives and shuts out all competion from other free market competators is ok you know)
The solution..............NONE, just wanted to communicate that when you think F2P is a great idea, and then complain its low quaility, then please understand what your going and dont think outside of both sides of your brain............
I never play F2P games. The way I need to play(and buy in the CS) to have fun often makes them much more expensive than P2P. And, yes, they often feel cheap and like lesser games.
There must be feedom of choice. And people that really dont like F2P/P2W/CS-games must be able to find alternatives. Higher quality games that are P2P only. I hope some companies understand that we need and want them. And will continue to offer them in the future.
Free to play is nothing more than a business revenue generator......
Thats all good if it provided for the consumer more immersion, new aspects to gaming, improved AI, mixing more RTS/FPS/RPG elements into one combined expierence, better quality games, polished, less bugs better graphics...ect
With improved technology we should expierence more for what we currently pay for, yet with F2P and those who participate in it, promote the garbage we see, we should see something more closely to Moore's Law (not pricisely, but not 10 year ago tech games with new skins)
With current software we get the same games that took lets say 100 people to make over thousands of manhours to complete in 2003. To games of the same quality in 2012 that takes 25 people to make with a few hundred manhours to finish (partially) coupled with F2P revenue................means you pay more, for the same, well really in the end with less.....lets play math.............
Of cource those who view the free market as a less of an idea and more an absolute religon would state that the F2P is the result of the consumer who is the one promoting its propagation (I mean a crew that is in mutiny, is never the fault of the capitan of ship who is %100 repsonsible for the actions of his crew unless captian disagress with it, or the CEO that dishes out garbage and does not provide any alternatives and shuts out all competion from other free market competators is ok you know)
The solution..............NONE, just wanted to communicate that when you think F2P is a great idea, and then complain its low quaility, then please understand what your going and dont think outside of both sides of your brain............
I never play F2P games. The way I need to play(and buy in the CS) to have fun often makes them much more expensive than P2P. And, yes, they often feel cheap and like lesser games.
There must be feedom of choice. And people that really dont like F2P/P2W/CS-games must be able to find alternatives. Higher quality games that are P2P only. I hope some companies understand that we need and want them. And will continue to offer them in the future.
Notice I didn't say that P2P doesn't have a place.
All I am saying is that - at present - it is not really viable *economically*.
The raft of both F2P and pay-once MMO-type games (both the original Guild Wars and GW2 are among the latter) is economically driven.
As the economy improves, I expect fewer (not more) F2P games, as the need for them economicaly will be lessened - symptom, not disease. (The disease is the poor economy.)
I never play F2P games. The way I need to play(and buy in the CS) to have fun often makes them much more expensive than P2P. And, yes, they often feel cheap and like lesser games.
There must be feedom of choice. And people that really dont like F2P/P2W/CS-games must be able to find alternatives. Higher quality games that are P2P only. I hope some companies understand that we need and want them. And will continue to offer them in the future.
This is the tough one, because they need folks to show this with their wallets - but - we run into the issue of how many different games there are.
If there were 2-5 games on the market, then those 2-5 games would split the market of those willing to pay for such a game. Take that out to 6-10+ games, and it becomes that much more difficult to sustain the game in that fashion.
Have to figure this is part of the reason that so many games have made that F2P/Freemium conversion. The market is simply too crowded. The sub MMO market's not quite like other markets out there. You can't really compare them to magazines because of cost. A better thing might be to consider TV, eh? There's usually only 2-4 competitors in the market. It really wouldn't be the same market with more - which is along the lines of what happened wtih MMOs.
It's a tough one - kind of leaves me feeling queasy, tbh. I do not hold out much hope for the genre.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Notice I didn't say that P2P doesn't have a place.
All I am saying is that - at present - it is not really viable *economically*.
The raft of both F2P and pay-once MMO-type games (both the original Guild Wars and GW2 are among the latter) is economically driven.
As the economy improves, I expect fewer (not more) F2P games, as the need for them economicaly will be lessened - symptom, not disease. (The disease is the poor economy.)
I'm not sure that the disease is a poor economy. Sure, the economy has made the situation worse - but it's not the disease itself. The economy improving will not resolve the issue either - not significantly, since it is not the root of the issue...that issue will still exist. You will also have people that become accustomed to it being a certain way - that will not change even if the economy improves. There will also be concerns about the economy going down the tubes again, so...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Fair enough. Personally, I've never comprehended this odd gamer's willingness to simply settle for less for more (which is clearly reality if one desires to enjoy the entirety of a game).
"F2P" is a voracious virus that video gaming has contracted. Hopefully it just runs it's course and takes down as few titles as possible in the process. Disposable games and disposable gamers are not an ideal concoction.
Let's see .. i get to play part of a game for FREE .. if the game is fun, is there any reason why i should not?
Surely i may not get to finish (or see) all teh content. So what .. it is fun, and then i move on to the next one.
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
What has "affordability" have to do with anything? it is about competition. I *can* afford a sub does not mean that I *want* to. When there are fun FREE games out there .. is there a reason why i should not play?
Plus, everyone can afford a F2P game ... let me give you a hint, it costs NOTHING for at least part of the game.
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
What has "affordability" have to do with anything? it is about competition. I *can* afford a sub does not mean that I *want* to. When there are fun FREE games out there .. is there a reason why i should not play?
Plus, everyone can afford a F2P game ... let me give you a hint, it costs NOTHING for at least part of the game.
Do you go to work for free? Or do you believe you should get paid for what you do?
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
But... but... but I am entitled to play mmorpg's because... well... ummm... other people get to play.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own. -- Herman Melville
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
What has "affordability" have to do with anything? it is about competition. I *can* afford a sub does not mean that I *want* to. When there are fun FREE games out there .. is there a reason why i should not play?
Plus, everyone can afford a F2P game ... let me give you a hint, it costs NOTHING for at least part of the game.
Do you go to work for free? Or do you believe you should get paid for what you do?
What does that has to do with free entertainment?
I watch TV for free, in exchange of my time for advertising (and sometimes i do not even watch that).
If I don't work for free, it does not mean that devs won't want to give out a game for free in hopes that someone will pay. You mean i should not play F2P MMO, or Freemium games just because i don't work for free?
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
My cousin works at the animal shelter as a volunteer. I will promptly go over and set all those doggies, bunnies, kittens, and gpigs free because they are a bunch of slackers! I'll tell her from here on out get a job that pays AND PAYS WELL!
Noobs.
Tomorrow, the old folks home *snickers evilly*.
Because we know the US does not have child labor laws and 95% of f2p clients are not children.
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
My cousin works at the animal shelter as a volunteer. I will promptly go over and set all those doggies, bunnies, kittens, and gpigs free because they are a bunch of slackers! I'll tell her from here on out get a job that pays AND PAYS WELL!
Noobs.
Tomorrow, the old folks home *snickers evilly*.
Because we know the US does not have child labor laws and 95% of f2p clients are not children.
Noobs.
You should. She's just going to get old and go on the welfare system and collect Social security for a back injury(you don't have to prove those) and live off other people's money because she's not setting anything aside for retirement(since she's a volunteer). And if she did quit, so what, some animals die, didn't you watch the lion king? Circle of life and all that. In fact, your sister is killing homeless people. Did you ever think of that? All those animals at the shelter could be feeding the homeless, maybe if earl at the safeway down the street was gnawing down on a bunny or guineapig, maybe he wouldn't be asking me "if I gotz a spare cig?"(which is odd, cause to date I've never gotten 21 in a pack?
My point is, your sister is disrupting the circle of life. What kind of sicko are you to want the homeless to starve?
(being irrational and abstract in our logic processes is fun!)
Free to play is nothing more than a business revenue generator......
Thats all good if it provided for the consumer more immersion, new aspects to gaming, improved AI, mixing more RTS/FPS/RPG elements into one combined expierence, better quality games, polished, less bugs better graphics...ect
With improved technology we should expierence more for what we currently pay for, yet with F2P and those who participate in it, promote the garbage we see, we should see something more closely to Moore's Law (not pricisely, but not 10 year ago tech games with new skins)
With current software we get the same games that took lets say 100 people to make over thousands of manhours to complete in 2003. To games of the same quality in 2012 that takes 25 people to make with a few hundred manhours to finish (partially) coupled with F2P revenue................means you pay more, for the same, well really in the end with less.....lets play math.............
Of cource those who view the free market as a less of an idea and more an absolute religon would state that the F2P is the result of the consumer who is the one promoting its propagation (I mean a crew that is in mutiny, is never the fault of the capitan of ship who is %100 repsonsible for the actions of his crew unless captian disagress with it, or the CEO that dishes out garbage and does not provide any alternatives and shuts out all competion from other free market competators is ok you know)
The solution..............NONE, just wanted to communicate that when you think F2P is a great idea, and then complain its low quaility, then please understand what your going and dont think outside of both sides of your brain............
neither GW2 nor planetside 2 are low quiality and none of those games could have been done 10 years ago.
your point has been proven wrong, but thx for the wall of text. didnt make it any righter tho.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
"F2P" is a voracious virus that video gaming has contracted. Hopefully it just runs it's course and takes down as few titles as possible in the process. Disposable games and disposable gamers are not an ideal concoction.
MMO companies are businesses, they are supposed to pick a business model that makes them money, not scream at the heavens "why?" as the business fails... (see: early RIAA/MPAA strategies for more details)
In 2012:
- games are cheap.
ME3 was on-sale for £7.50 ($12), BF3 I believe was recently on sale for a similar price. Civ5 (I think) is free if you purchase UFO.... For the PS3 with PSN+ you get 1+ AAA games free every month... kickstarter, steam sales, indy games...
If you are expecting to sell a game for the price of a new AAA title, plus charge the equivalent of a recently released AAA game every month, then your business model is hilarious.
- there are plenty of games that are F2P.
If you are charging $x a month, and MMO #2 isn't... then you need to be worth $x a month more than the competition... and, in truth, you aren't.
B2P/F2P is an opportunity for MMO companies to compete in a fiercely aggressive market.
Thats why i don't want to even touch f2p games, well i bought gw2 but played only for few hours. It feels so much scam and it reminds me on eve online Jita scammers It is nothing for free and you will spend much much more money then on games with subscription. Even if my 2 favorite games wow and eve online would become f2p i would live them in a sec. And if everything is ''F2P'' i go back to single player!
Comments
I don't understand why it has to be one way or another. MMOs are not all the same qaulity, so why should they all cost the same price? I have no problem with f2p, b2p, freemium games existing. But i think the sub model could also advance past $14.99- I would be willing to pay a lot more than that a month for the kind of MMO experience I'm looking for.
The idea that because some games are b2p or f2p they all will be seems strange to me, as does the constant downward trend in service and value of the games released. It doesn't work this way in the rest of our society- for example, just because you can buy cheap clothes at walmart or eat cheap at mcdonalds doesn't mean we all want to. There are plenty of gamers with money to spend who I think would be willing to pay more to get more just like I would.
True, although that is why CoH shut down. Too many people figured someone else was supporting the game while they played for free and the company didn't make enough money.
That is the ultimate problem with F2P because the companies have to make sure enough people will pay. To do that they typically have to start putting more and more necessary elements in the store so more and more people pay. I do think that the EvE/Puzzle Pirates/now GW2 approach to a store where you let them buy a currency they can trade to others is a good alternate approach. It allows people with money to essentially buy items from other players with real world money. Then those cheap people can get a subscription for free in something like EvE and Puzzle Pirates buy trading for credits. Or get stuff from the store for free in something like GW2. Of course my only problem with GW2 is they charged a box price AND have a store which is kind of messed up.
Since you have so much money to spare just pay for our subs while you're at it! Oops, that is the f2p concept.
I think the problem is that a group of individuals wanted to play a high quality mmo without paying a monthly sub, prob because their parents didnt want to pay for it. Then when it was delivered, the company realized that they were making no money, thus the item shop. Then the company realized that they were making a killing off of people who want to get to the so called "end game content" quick, so they make it so that you have to spend $30+ to get what you want quicker. And the companys just mimic each other and poof it offically costs more to enjoy yourself to the fullest in a F2P than a subscription game. This may not have been exactly what happened, but im sure its close.
I agree with the original poster, F2P is a scam, and your crazy if you dont think it is. But it is us the players that made that scam a reality...
Fair enough. Personally, I've never comprehended this odd gamer's willingness to simply settle for less for more (which is clearly reality if one desires to enjoy the entirety of a game).
"F2P" is a voracious virus that video gaming has contracted. Hopefully it just runs it's course and takes down as few titles as possible in the process. Disposable games and disposable gamers are not an ideal concoction.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
ok, i think I have came up with a simple solution to this entire thread.....
if you dont like F2P...
Don't Play them
/thread
I have a simpler solution.
If you can't afford to pay for something, you go without.
/countless threads
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
The original poster (like most of those that feel that F2P is some sort of scam) was doubtless originally a traditional subscriber that saw their MMO go either partially or completely F2P and is upset at what the poster sees as a *cheapening* of the experience. It's an opinion - however, it has to be taken with a grain of salt the size of the Ross Ice Shelf. Why? Because like all opinions, it is *subjective* and not generally debatable on its merits.
Let's look at recent (relatively speaking) F2P conversion DCUO. Since the conversion, they have added (not subtracted) content - both paid and otherwise. They have added three DLC packs (Lightning Strikes, The Last Laugh, and Battle for Earth), and will add a third (Hand of Fate) within the month. They have gotten me to do something that even the original Guild Wars could never do - purchase DLC. (I purchased both Lightning Strikes *and* Battle for Earth - and I'm normally so NOT a DLC purchaser - for any game.) Since I made that purchase, they have added three game updates (the last - Game Update 18 - cleans up an imbalance created by two previous updates and a DLC pack - oddly enough, it was the PvP-targeted "The Last Laugh" DLC that really messed things up). MMORPGs generally do not have an *endgame* - unlike any traditional RPG. That "in and of itself" means that adding additional content has to be a consideration. DLC packs can highlight either a character/characters, power sets, types, of play, or mutiple of these at once. ("Battle for Earth" is a multifaceted DLC pack - it highlights the new set of Earth Powers, and it further fleshes out the main storyline for the core game itself - metahumanity vs. the sociopathic AI that is Brainiac.)
Now we come down to what convinced me to "break my own rule" and purchase DLC (and "Battle for Earth" in particular) - it was the story/plot.
In order to convince a player to purchase add-ons, the publisher/developer has to convince players that the DLC is an essential add-on to advance the plot. (Remember - the core of the plot of DCUO from the jump is to take down Brainiac - permanently. Both heroes and villains have a vested interest in this - even Lex Luthor - in all his seeming single-mindedness to take down Superman - hasn't forgotten this rather significant motive.) What was the linchpin - and the motive for me? It was a level 30 mission against Luthor - inside no less than the Hall of Doom itself - to rescue Superman. There was the reality that I specifically OWE Future Lex for my character being what he is today; he pilfered collected exobytes from Future Brainiac that enabled my metahumanity. However, I no more wanted Brainiac to win than I wanted Lex to win. That meant that I had to go through Lex to be in a position to satisfy my own "mission" - stopping Brainiac. And , therefore, if I wanted to be in on the end of Brainiac, I needed the "Battle for Earth" DLC. Everything else - and I mean exactly that - was secondary. The developer/publisher did their job - they made the purchase necessary. However, they also made the purchase rather easy - it's a one-time cost of a mere $10 (at regular price - they had been running a DLC sale which cut that price in half) - hence, that bite was far easier to swallow compared to typical pricing for DLC for a game, even an MMO.
Another thing about "Battle for Earth" is that it exposes many subplots within the entire game.
1. Wonder Woman vs. Circe.
2. The conflicted postion of Aquaman and Atlantis in terms of "drylanders"
3. How things aren't exactly hunky-dory within the Legion of Doom.
4. Some rather surprising machinations from what are arguably "villain" characters (Two-Face, Riddler/Edward Nygma, and even Catwoman, let alone the rather UNsurprising motivation behind Black Adam).
"Battle" covers all of it - and then some - for a surprisingly cheap $10.
The difference (for me, as opposed to the OP) is that I came in post-F2P - which made the sale surprisingly easy. (I willingly admit, that had I been in the OP's position, I would be feeling rather frustrated over a non-Legendary member (I'm a Premium member, and was prior to purchasing the DLC) have access to content to which I would be entitled *as* a Legendary member (that didn't change for the simple reason that Legendary/traditional membership didn't go away) - and therein lies the difference. In order for the Legendary member to get his content, the developer/publisher needed additional revenue to cover development costs OF that content. Hence the need to make it available outside the original *field of membership*. However, I've been where the OP is - and thus can understand why the developer/publisher would make that maneuver. However much we wish that they didn't have to, they, unfortunately for us, DID have to, for reasons of economics.)
I never play F2P games. The way I need to play(and buy in the CS) to have fun often makes them much more expensive than P2P. And, yes, they often feel cheap and like lesser games.
There must be feedom of choice. And people that really dont like F2P/P2W/CS-games must be able to find alternatives. Higher quality games that are P2P only. I hope some companies understand that we need and want them. And will continue to offer them in the future.
Notice I didn't say that P2P doesn't have a place.
All I am saying is that - at present - it is not really viable *economically*.
The raft of both F2P and pay-once MMO-type games (both the original Guild Wars and GW2 are among the latter) is economically driven.
As the economy improves, I expect fewer (not more) F2P games, as the need for them economicaly will be lessened - symptom, not disease. (The disease is the poor economy.)
This is the tough one, because they need folks to show this with their wallets - but - we run into the issue of how many different games there are.
If there were 2-5 games on the market, then those 2-5 games would split the market of those willing to pay for such a game. Take that out to 6-10+ games, and it becomes that much more difficult to sustain the game in that fashion.
Have to figure this is part of the reason that so many games have made that F2P/Freemium conversion. The market is simply too crowded. The sub MMO market's not quite like other markets out there. You can't really compare them to magazines because of cost. A better thing might be to consider TV, eh? There's usually only 2-4 competitors in the market. It really wouldn't be the same market with more - which is along the lines of what happened wtih MMOs.
It's a tough one - kind of leaves me feeling queasy, tbh. I do not hold out much hope for the genre.
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
I'm not sure that the disease is a poor economy. Sure, the economy has made the situation worse - but it's not the disease itself. The economy improving will not resolve the issue either - not significantly, since it is not the root of the issue...that issue will still exist. You will also have people that become accustomed to it being a certain way - that will not change even if the economy improves. There will also be concerns about the economy going down the tubes again, so...
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
Let's see .. i get to play part of a game for FREE .. if the game is fun, is there any reason why i should not?
Surely i may not get to finish (or see) all teh content. So what .. it is fun, and then i move on to the next one.
What has "affordability" have to do with anything? it is about competition. I *can* afford a sub does not mean that I *want* to. When there are fun FREE games out there .. is there a reason why i should not play?
Plus, everyone can afford a F2P game ... let me give you a hint, it costs NOTHING for at least part of the game.
Do you go to work for free? Or do you believe you should get paid for what you do?
I miss the MMORPG genre. Will a developer ever make one again?
Explorer: 87%, Killer: 67%, Achiever: 27%, Socializer: 20%
But... but... but I am entitled to play mmorpg's because... well... ummm... other people get to play.
There are certain queer times and occasions in this strange mixed affair we call life when a man takes this whole universe for a vast practical joke, though the wit thereof he but dimly discerns, and more than suspects that the joke is at nobody's expense but his own.
-- Herman Melville
What does that has to do with free entertainment?
I watch TV for free, in exchange of my time for advertising (and sometimes i do not even watch that).
If I don't work for free, it does not mean that devs won't want to give out a game for free in hopes that someone will pay. You mean i should not play F2P MMO, or Freemium games just because i don't work for free?
Get real.
My cousin works at the animal shelter as a volunteer. I will promptly go over and set all those doggies, bunnies, kittens, and gpigs free because they are a bunch of slackers! I'll tell her from here on out get a job that pays AND PAYS WELL!
Noobs.
Tomorrow, the old folks home *snickers evilly*.
Because we know the US does not have child labor laws and 95% of f2p clients are not children.
Noobs.
You should. She's just going to get old and go on the welfare system and collect Social security for a back injury(you don't have to prove those) and live off other people's money because she's not setting anything aside for retirement(since she's a volunteer). And if she did quit, so what, some animals die, didn't you watch the lion king? Circle of life and all that. In fact, your sister is killing homeless people. Did you ever think of that? All those animals at the shelter could be feeding the homeless, maybe if earl at the safeway down the street was gnawing down on a bunny or guineapig, maybe he wouldn't be asking me "if I gotz a spare cig?"(which is odd, cause to date I've never gotten 21 in a pack?
My point is, your sister is disrupting the circle of life. What kind of sicko are you to want the homeless to starve?
(being irrational and abstract in our logic processes is fun!)
It suprises me that there are gamers that aren't open-minded, they asume that if they feel something is trash then it is fact.
I don't like Lady Gaga, but I definitly am NOT looking down at people who do.
Let people enjoy what they enjoy and enjoy the things you yourself enjoy!!
neither GW2 nor planetside 2 are low quiality and none of those games could have been done 10 years ago.
your point has been proven wrong, but thx for the wall of text. didnt make it any righter tho.
"I'll never grow up, never grow up, never grow up! Not me!"
MMO companies are businesses, they are supposed to pick a business model that makes them money, not scream at the heavens "why?" as the business fails... (see: early RIAA/MPAA strategies for more details)
In 2012:
- games are cheap.
ME3 was on-sale for £7.50 ($12), BF3 I believe was recently on sale for a similar price. Civ5 (I think) is free if you purchase UFO.... For the PS3 with PSN+ you get 1+ AAA games free every month... kickstarter, steam sales, indy games...
If you are expecting to sell a game for the price of a new AAA title, plus charge the equivalent of a recently released AAA game every month, then your business model is hilarious.
- there are plenty of games that are F2P.
If you are charging $x a month, and MMO #2 isn't... then you need to be worth $x a month more than the competition... and, in truth, you aren't.
B2P/F2P is an opportunity for MMO companies to compete in a fiercely aggressive market.