It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
We're seeing quite a lot of games going the direction of F2P but will we ever see a game go from F2P to P2P?
I think the knee-jerk reaction would be "no", but if a developer makes some dramatic improvements to their offering and regains a loyal player-base would it be possible or even beneficial to attempt to switch back to a P2P model?
We see reports that games going F2P actually see revenue boosts but my guess is that most developers would prefer the stability and predictable revenue of the P2P model.
Comments
If most developers prefer the stability and predictable revenue, then why is the market trending towards F2P? The F2P share grows from something like 39% to 50% (in revenue of MMO market) in the last 2-3 years.
I think it is exactly the opposite, they prefer a higher average rate of return with more risk. Now that is taking risk.
There is no point switching back to P2P. F2P games depends on whales that spends much more than a sub. If you go back to P2P, you dramatically lower the amount a whale is going to pay. And i doubt you are going to get much of the free riders pay up. They will just move to another F2P game.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
F2P might make a transition more towards freemium with VIP status and gold memberships. The old way of doing P2P is dead though. Going Buy 2 play might also make sense for these solo centric MMOs like GW2 and TSW. TERA should have went Buy 2 play and not free 2 play.
That is a good point, I can see WoW staying P2P forever, probably EvE as well. Probably Rift as long as content is continued to be delievered at the pace it has since release, maybe ESO when it comes out. But it does look grim for the P2P market.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
The amount of rage and crying from people who would have to actually pay for a product they use for hundreds of hours created by hundreds of people over years would be so massive that the game companies probably wouldn't bother.
It's sad to me that people are unwilling to pay a dime for something they enjoy and use frequently that took years to create and peoples jobs and families depend on.
Oh well, cheap is a powerful mindset.
I don't think a full switch is likely. Dev / publishers love their item shops, and I can't see them giving that up.
Emphatically No. Common (business) sense says you will stand to make MORE money a la carte vs flat rate because you can never predict how much money a particular gamer will spend. Giving away everything for a flat 15/mo is leaving money on the table.
Works better for me in the long run as I dont like paying for aspects of games I will never play. If there a feature I really like and its not part of the F2P I'll happily buy it as there is value.
F2P success is going to be on a case-by-case basis dependent on how the developer implmented the model. TSW F2P is better than SWTOR F2P for example. Its a delicate balance they will learn through experience over time.
Ah tell me more about how Free to Play City of Heroes was raining cash on developers
Sorry, I just feel that if a person finds something worth playing for hundreds of hours, perhaps they should pay money for it? I know its a wild notion that flies in the face of the "I'm never paying any sub again" mindset all over this forum, but hey, I guess getting paid for ones work is outdated now.
So yeah, tell me how paying for a product is a bad thing. Please I'd love to hear it
If alienation was the most important issue, games wouldn't switch either way. The question is which business model will bring in the most revenue for the game at hand.
The truth is, even if you support the free to play titles you play, you are one person. Coming across the "never going to pay a sub again" lines in this forum is extremely common. So while you might pay money, many many others do not and see no reason to ever pay anything. A subscription would mean that every player sticking around supports the company.
In this case I'm not really debating the two pay systems, but rather saying I find cheapskates offensive. "Gimme!"
It is more the stingy attitude of never-pay free players that I draw issue with. They have every intention to play as much as possible while paying nothing.
Even Vork from "The Guild" paid a subscription even when he was stealing electricity and WifFi from his neighbor with Alzheimer's.
Funny that you should ask, fat_taddler. I was on Massively a couple of days ago and read that Allods Russia opened up a subscription-based server.
They really should have done this a long time ago, but it will still be interesting to see how it pans out.
"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
That is human nature. Why should i pay a dime when there is free alternatives? The cost does not matter to consumers. It is not their costs.
Well, in that case, you are going to be offended for a long time and by a lot of people. Statistics show that a majority of MMO players never pay anything.
But i am curious of why you are offended. It is not even your game. If the owner (i.e. dev or publisher) wants to give part of it away, what is it to you?
Of course. Free to Play games generally retain a subscription option. If the game is doing well, the developers can either offer less and less of the new content piecemeal, or raise the price of it to the point where subscribing is a more appealing option. Eventually, the cash shop could revert to a curiosity that sells a few old, outdated pieces that no one is interested in.
That's *if* the game starts doing much better.
Games dont hold up to keep paying customers for a long period of time. They have to do something to keep people in to try to milk some extra money. Going f2p is their only option. If a mmorpg was out of this world, full of content, had tools to make your own, and just crammed pack full of features the pay model is trivial. Sadly e dont have to many of those games released, thus more games resorting to f2p to get you in, then get your money from the item shops.
Making a great game will bring the money f2p or b2p. Its just another fad until they understand this.
Can F2P games ever go back to P2P?
No, ...
1) ... because the marketing brand 'f2p' is now burned into the mind of the customers. just have a look around, people over-simplify the term 'f2p' without even the slightest consideration that there are a lot of diffrent f2p models out there. all f2p titles have only one thing in common: the client for the basic game is free. after that there are about 4-5 diffrent concepts. from the classic 'pay to win' to the 'you can choose the content to pay for' or the 'we only want to force you into subscription'. i really would like to see that people don't use the term 'f2p' so light headed and be more specific about it.
2) ... because there are quite a few reasons why companies choose the f2p revenue model for their game. there are several reasons why a (client based) mmog went the path of f2p. only to name 3 of these reasons:
a) it was a high budget p2p title with a solid and loyal playerbase, but the company wanted a bigger slice of the mmog customer base after 2005 and jumped on the 'f2p marketing train'. (f.e. eq I and II, lotro, ddo, aoc and so on).
b) the game dosen't have the quality that players will pay for it (classic low budget grinders)
c) the game is made for a special market. never underestimate the huge differences in customers behaviour between the asia and the north america market. and even between north america and europe are differences, lesser significant but existent.
I don't think that is really possible. How do you justify all the cash shop purchases people made? That is one of the questions that will come up. I guess they could start charging a sub and remove any restrictions but keep the cash shop..
I think companies spend too much money converting to F2P and changing the way the game works to really switch back. You go F2P to get people playing the game. It would be pretty hard to convince a publisher or investor that going BACK to P2P is the right choice especially when you had to switch to F2P to begin with.
This is a really tough one, but I don't think they can. It may be possible for games to add a premium fee to the game that gets you more stuff or currency if one is not available, but I think thats the extreme. Maybe something like League of Legends offering X amount of Riot points and a permanent boost to exp gain for 10$ a month.
Part of having a sub these days is producing enough quality content for the game to warrant it. The game also has to have enough stickiness to keep people paying every month. Very few games pull that off. Most of the sub games that are older are only around because they don't cost much to manage and would probably end up spending more money on a F2P transition then they would actually gain from it.
All fine and dandy, but why should I pay for the time I'm not paying? F2P or B2P model allows me to play and pay at my own leasiure. Even better when there is hybrid model in place (optional sub) because then, when I have a month with more free time I can grab a sub to support a title I enjoy and still play ocassionaly after I stop paying.
Then there is this simple issu - while subscription at least meant soemthng long time ago, today they are one of many payments that youa re expected to make in a MMO. When I pay sub I expect 100% of content to be avalible to me, yet companies more and more often put out sub + cash shop + whatever additional fees they desire.
Third thing is, MMOs heavily depend on playerbase. F2P gives larger playerbase, which means more peopel to group with, more peopel to PVP against, more poeple participating in the in-game economy, all beneficial to premium/paying players. Considering most MMOs that went F2P or B2P noticed an increase in player activity at ~200-300% that's a whole lot of people you'd be missing out on.
So no. It's not about being cheap. It's about prefering covenience.
P2P is dieing for a good reason...it's a stupid way to run an mmorpg. Don't be fooled by the "know-it-alls" here that say f2p is just a game dieing or some trick to fool people. They're just old subers who can't adjust. The name free to play may be missleading to some but it's still a cheaper and often less restrictive way to play in a market that often has customers who like/want to play multiple mmos at the same time.
There's no reason for a f2p game to ever go sub because if they want people paying a sub they just offer premium content while leaving the rest of the game "free" We see it all the time already.
Switching over and forcing everyone to pay or leave would be about as smart as the NGE was in swg.