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!

Sony feels that F2P is the only way to go with MMO's

135

Comments

  • Goatgod76Goatgod76 Stow, OHPosts: 1,214Member
    Take a look at the thread Anybody-for-an-MMO-Questionnaire and it will tell you by looking at the question on how much people have spent in the last 6 months in MMO's why most companies think F2P is the way to go. It is for them by a large margin apparently...as they make MUCH more per month off suckers.
  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by Goatgod76
    Take a look at the thread Anybody-for-an-MMO-Questionnaire and it will tell you by looking at the question on how much people have spent in the last 6 months in MMO's why most companies think F2P is the way to go. It is for them by a large margin apparently...as they make MUCH more per month off suckers.

     Its true, people who not only paid for the box, but monthly subscriptions for SWTOR, TSW, AoC, UO and so many others that did poorly, were NOT suckers.

    Nope, it was money well spent.

    Best part about it, subscriptions were created on a lie...to pay for bandwidth costs that didnt exist...lol

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • RobokappRobokapp Dublin, OHPosts: 5,205Member Uncommon

    step 1: make f2p mmo.

    step 2: others make other f2p mmo's.

    step 3: wondr why you have no player retention when you are not asking for any commitment from the player.

    step 4: cash in on remaining players to cover expenses.

    step 5: ???

    step 6: no profit.

    image

  • Goatgod76Goatgod76 Stow, OHPosts: 1,214Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Goatgod76
    Take a look at the thread Anybody-for-an-MMO-Questionnaire and it will tell you by looking at the question on how much people have spent in the last 6 months in MMO's why most companies think F2P is the way to go. It is for them by a large margin apparently...as they make MUCH more per month off suckers.

     Its true, people who not only paid for the box, but monthly subscriptions for SWTOR, TSW, AoC, UO and so many others that did poorly, were NOT suckers.

    Nope, it was money well spent.

    Best part about it, subscriptions were created on a lie...to pay for bandwidth costs that didnt exist...lol

    UO and EQ had player retention...and still do some 13+ years later. Not to mention have tons of content. So yeah, it was money well spent with them.

    Where as ones like SWTOR and TSW...or pretty much any other post 2004 MMO...go F2P to make quick money and gobs of it quickly as possible before player numbers fall off enough to close down servers since they know they don't have the mechanics nor content to retain players for the long run.

    People who fall for those types of games are suckers. Especially because they could of saved themselves the trouble, wasted time, and money waiting to see reviews and research them themsleves before diving in based on hype and wanting to dip into the newest shiney on the shelf.

    My entire 5 years spent in EQ at $14.99 a month (Plus box fees from EQ Original to Gates of Discord *7 expansions* - say box price of $50 each) comes up to $1249.45 and some change. Some players can and do spend much more than that in half the time if not less on F2P types (again, look at that thread at the amounts spent in 6 months for most and add that over 5 years). Which is a better value.

  • RobokappRobokapp Dublin, OHPosts: 5,205Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Robokapp
    [mod edit]

    [mod edit]

    i'm not sure how attacking P2Ps helps F2Ps but thanks for the fix.

     as the 2007+ era thought us, if step 1 includes "crap", then steps 5 and 6 are the same regardless of payment model.

     

    it's not too expensive no matter what model it is. MMOs are the cheap alternative to real entertainment.

     

    If it's too bad to be worth the money and / or time, most often too bad to be worth the TIME, really, it will fail under any model.

     

    There's browser games out there that are 100% free. They're meaningless little distractions that don't have a billion players because the financial model is so great. Next step is them paying us to play...

    image

  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member
    Originally posted by Robokapp
    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by Robokapp
    [mod edit]

    [mod edit]

    i'm not sure how attacking P2Ps helps F2Ps but thanks for the fix.

     as the 2007+ era thought us, if step 1 includes "crap", then steps 5 and 6 are the same regardless of payment model.

     

    it's not too expensive no matter what model it is. MMOs are the cheap alternative to real entertainment.

     

    If it's too bad to be worth the money and / or time, most often too bad to be worth the TIME, really, it will fail under any model.

     

    There's browser games out there that are 100% free. They're meaningless little distractions that don't have a billion players because the financial model is so great. Next step is them paying us to play...

    Agree 100% tyvm

    image

  • TorvalTorval Oregon CountryPosts: 7,195Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by SoMuchMass
    Only the cream of the crop can charge subs for MMOs.  Average to below average games cannot in this competitive market.  We will always see subscription MMOs but they will be the best there is.  Others who don't offer as much will have to be F2P.  Players on average can pay one subscription but aren't willing to pay for more than one.

    I don't think it's even the cream of the crop anymore, but how much people feel locked into their older games.  If you own all the WoW expansions, have capped and geared characters, plus a lot of in game acquaintances/friends, then that is a lot to give up to start all over in a new world.  It only costs $15 per month plus $50 every two years for the game.  Even though they could play as cheap or cheaper in newer games it will take a lot of time investment to become established again.  Re-creating a community from scratch is an enourmous undertaking.

    There's a lot to risk moving from an established game.  That sort of momentum I think has contributed significantly to older sub games like WoW and EVE remaining viable in their payment model.  Those things contribute to an inertia that new games just can't generate or sustain.

    Once those games lose that, then I think we'll see that model crumble.  It's already no longer purely a subscription model anyway.  They all supplement the model with box fees, expansion fees, some micro-transactions, and rmt gold sales.  The last game I remember being purely subscription was (is) Lineage.

    I can't see any game on the horizon that will be more successful locked behind a subscription, than I think they would be under a sub-free model.

     

  • thinktank001thinktank001 oasisPosts: 2,027Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs

    If you dont have millions of subscribers, you will make far more with a good F2P offer.

    Anyway, before Nexons bid, few took F2P seriously as a money maker...becaue most companies are short-sighted and locked on old thinking and never REALLY LOOKED at what Asian and some European companies were making...I mean come on Runes of Magic was making more money that FUNCOM was making total for 3 YEARS STRAIGHT! One F2P game, making more than every game Funcom had going.

     

    This is complete bs.   Nexon (NA) had 17 milliion in revenue 2011.   That is less than a 100k subscribers between all their games they offer.

     

     

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by thinktank001
    Originally posted by jtcgs

    If you dont have millions of subscribers, you will make far more with a good F2P offer.

    Anyway, before Nexons bid, few took F2P seriously as a money maker...becaue most companies are short-sighted and locked on old thinking and never REALLY LOOKED at what Asian and some European companies were making...I mean come on Runes of Magic was making more money that FUNCOM was making total for 3 YEARS STRAIGHT! One F2P game, making more than every game Funcom had going.

    This is complete bs.   Nexon (NA) had 17 milliion in revenue 2011.   That is less than a 100k subscribers between all their games they offer.

     This is complete BS. Nexon made a bid on EA...holy crap where did you get 17 million from?!?

    Nexon went public on the Tokyo stock exchange in 2011...and had the SECOND LARGEST OPENING for a tech company in HISTORY...only outdone by Facebook. AND they BOUGHT NDOORS for 153.9 MILLION...

    2011  = 1.12 BILLION US dollars.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • XAPKenXAPKen Northwest, INPosts: 4,912Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Isturi

    In a  Interview  SOE Smedley "says that since the move to free-to-play, SOE has seen a 300 percent increase in new players for EverQuest 2, a 125 percent increase in item sales for EverQuest and a 350 percent bump in overall registrations. Planetside 2, its most recent release, has more than 1.6 million registered users, with 750,000 logging in to play every week."

    Notice that the factual references completely omit "Net Profit".  If sales are up 25% but costs up 100%, that's hardly growth.

     

     


    Ken Fisher - Semi retired old fart Network Administrator, now turned Amateur Game Developer.  I don't Forum PVP.  If you feel I've attacked you, it was probably by accident.  Realm Lords 2 on MMORPG.com
  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member
    Originally posted by Robokapp

    i'm not sure how attacking P2Ps helps F2Ps but thanks for the fix.

     as the 2007+ era thought us, if step 1 includes "crap", then steps 5 and 6 are the same regardless of payment model.

     

    it's not too expensive no matter what model it is. MMOs are the cheap alternative to real entertainment.

     

    If it's too bad to be worth the money and / or time, most often too bad to be worth the TIME, really, it will fail under any model.

     

    There's browser games out there that are 100% free. They're meaningless little distractions that don't have a billion players because the financial model is so great. Next step is them paying us to play...

     Well, I'm not sure how attacking F2Ps helps P2Ps either.

    You are basing the idea that a game must be BAD to not be worth paying for and thus all F2Ps must be bad. You dont factor in that people are learning that being charged money per month is a SCAM because the quality of F2P games and B2P games are now matching the BEST P2P games.

    [mod edit]

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • jedensuscgjedensuscg Kodiak, AKPosts: 209Member

    Actually, PS2 IS meant for the mainstream audience.

    If it was not they would not have removed 90% of the mechanics and flair that made PS1 unique, but more niche and ultimatly more fun.

    Instead SOE opted to mimic BF and CoD just on a larger scale, and every single mechanic in the game is intended to appeal to the massive FPS kiddies that can't handle a game with any sort of stratetic element.

    image

  • thinktank001thinktank001 oasisPosts: 2,027Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by jtcgs

     This is complete BS. Nexon made a bid on EA...holy crap where did you get 17 million from?!?

    Nexon went public on the Tokyo stock exchange in 2011...and had the SECOND LARGEST OPENING for a tech company in HISTORY...only outdone by Facebook. AND they BOUGHT NDOORS for 153.9 MILLION...

    2011  = 1.12 BILLION US dollars.

     

    Yes, they made over a bil including every single region, but their NA division only made 17 mil.   They are large across the pacific, but their NA and EU division isn't doing so hot.   Why do you think they wanted to purchase EA?   If they can't get a foot hold, then buy someone who already does.

     

  • MarirranyaMarirranya Ortario, OHPosts: 154Member
    Originally posted by Rider071

    I agree with Smedley (this time). SOE has helped advance the F2P model far beyond what it was 2 years ago. They have made various matrixes for their games, so good, some bad, but definitely new and innovative.

    Personally I loved the matrix they held for EQ2:Extended, but they changed that model when they opened F2P to the entire game, which was sad. But hey, they take chances to make the most profit they can in the end.

    I play EQ1 as my default game, and I support SOE in buying it's game cards for SOE cash, but once a better game (or hyped game) comes out, I do go and play it...because F2P gives me the freedom to do so, and also because SOE has yet to find the perfect matrix that doesn't make me feel that I'm not able to experience the entire game. Preventing gear without the ability to unlock said gear through payment is definitely a gamestopper for me, as why I have no intention to see end game in EQ1 (my first mmo love).

    Currently though I am playing TERA, with their announcement to F2P I purchased the game to become a 'founder'. It was bumbpy getting into the game (those problems solved), but the game is definitely fun, and wel worth the B2P investment so far. Their matrix looks very promising as well.

    Honestly, I know many gamers over the years, and I have yet to talk to a single one i know personally that still plays WoW, or subs to any P2P game at all. So not sure where the sub numbers come from for WoW, but i have a very strong feeling that the numbers are false. I just can't understand how anyone would sub to a P2P game when there are so many great F2P games out there today, there really are.

    EQ1, EQ2, Vanguard, PSP2, DCOU, Aion, Aika, AoC, LotRO, WARTrial, TERA, DDO, Perfect World International, GW1, GW2....just to name a few I have experienced and regularly play. There are so many more, and so many more to come

     

    i still play wow - bought mists of pandaria and subbed :<

    nostalgia and curiosity i guess? xD

    There are people who play games and then there are gamers.

    http://alzplz.blogspot.com

  • XiaokiXiaoki White Pigeon, MIPosts: 2,601Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by jtcgs
    Originally posted by thinktank001 Originally posted by jtcgs If you dont have millions of subscribers, you will make far more with a good F2P offer. Anyway, before Nexons bid, few took F2P seriously as a money maker...becaue most companies are short-sighted and locked on old thinking and never REALLY LOOKED at what Asian and some European companies were making...I mean come on Runes of Magic was making more money that FUNCOM was making total for 3 YEARS STRAIGHT! One F2P game, making more than every game Funcom had going.
    This is complete bs.   Nexon (NA) had 17 milliion in revenue 2011.   That is less than a 100k subscribers between all their games they offer.
     This is complete BS. Nexon made a bid on EA...holy crap where did you get 17 million from?!?

    Nexon went public on the Tokyo stock exchange in 2011...and had the SECOND LARGEST OPENING for a tech company in HISTORY...only outdone by Facebook. AND they BOUGHT NDOORS for 153.9 MILLION...

    2011  = 1.12 BILLION US dollars.



    Yeah, I know how much they made in 2011.


    EA on the other hand made $4.2 billion in revenue. The year before they made $3.8 billion.


    EAs digital distribution(PopCap Games, Origin) makes more in year than the entirety of Nexon.


    Give it up already, Nexon cant come close to EA.


  • AIMonsterAIMonster Apopka, FLPosts: 2,059Member
    Originally posted by jtcgs

    No...

    Nexon's bid was a joke.

    Nexon has made 1.2 billion in profits each of the last two years. EA has been averaging around 1.4 billion a year.

    EA is still the largest in the world, Nexon is #2 in the world. They made a bid to get people to actually LOOK at Nexon, and how they got where they did to shake up the MMO world, they are the reason why so many companies in the genre took a serious look at the F2P market, and saw that the real money is not in the subscription field unless you have a massive product like WoW.

    If you dont have millions of subscribers, you will make far more with a good F2P offer.

    Anyway, before Nexons bid, few took F2P seriously as a money maker...becaue most companies are short-sighted and locked on old thinking and never REALLY LOOKED at what Asian and some European companies were making...I mean come on Runes of Magic was making more money that FUNCOM was making total for 3 YEARS STRAIGHT! One F2P game, making more than every game Funcom had going.

    EA is not the largest in the world.  EA is currently the third largest video game publisher in the world.  Nintendo and Activision/Blizzard are larger at the moment in terms of annual revenue.  Sony and Microsoft Games are also very close, if not larger by now.

    I don't believe EA was ever the largest.  They were second at one point behind Nintendo.  They used to be the largest game publisher in the US though.

    image

    Raptr link because it's the cool new trend:
    image

  • ArclanArclan Chicago, ILPosts: 1,494Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by XAPGames
    Originally posted by Isturi In a  Interview  SOE Smedley "says that since the move to free-to-play, SOE has seen a 300 percent increase in new players for EverQuest 2, a 125 percent increase in item sales for EverQuest and a 350 percent bump in overall registrations. Planetside 2, its most recent release, has more than 1.6 million registered users, with 750,000 logging in to play every week."
    Notice that the factual references completely omit "Net Profit".  If sales are up 25% but costs up 100%, that's hardly growth.

     

     



    Yes exactly. Smed presented more misinformation than information. "Hey the plane crashed, but the good news is 100% of the survivors are alive. Bad news is, there were no survivors."

    So many good posts in this thread. /waves all.

    Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
    In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit

  • PhelcherPhelcher Boston, MAPosts: 1,053Member
    Those who dont see pay to play going anywhere are the same children who dont see a house payment, nor bar tabs.

    Most mmorpg players have no problem wanting to spend $15~$20/month on their game. It is only those ultra-wannabe casual children who dont wish to subscribe to anything... cuz their so neurotic, they cant sit still for one game.

    $240/ year is peanuts to an advid gamer... too much to an adolecent who doesnt have an income.

    "No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


    -Nariusseldon

  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Those who dont see pay to play going anywhere are the same children who dont see a house payment, nor bar tabs.

    Most mmorpg players have no problem wanting to spend $15~$20/month on their game. It is only those ultra-wannabe casual children who dont wish to subscribe to anything... cuz their so neurotic, they cant sit still for one game.

    $240/ year is peanuts to an advid gamer... too much to an adolecent who doesnt have an income.

    Cant argue logic.

    image

  • VengeSunsoarVengeSunsoar Posts: 5,314Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Phelcher
    Those who dont see pay to play going anywhere are the same children who dont see a house payment, nor bar tabs.

    Most mmorpg players have no problem wanting to spend $15~$20/month on their game. It is only those ultra-wannabe casual children who dont wish to subscribe to anything... cuz their so neurotic, they cant sit still for one game.

    $240/ year is peanuts to an advid gamer... too much to an adolecent who doesnt have an income.

     I have a mortgage, I don't have a bar tab.  I have no issues with f2p. 

    Quit worrying about other players in a game and just play.

  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Isturi

    In a  Interview  SOE Smedley "says that since the move to free-to-play, SOE has seen a 300 percent increase in new players for EverQuest 2, a 125 percent increase in item sales for EverQuest and a 350 percent bump in overall registrations. Planetside 2, its most recent release, has more than 1.6 million registered users, with 750,000 logging in to play every week."

    Now lets face it in my every so humble opinion. SOE I feel is not the giant it think it is in the MMO world and hey if F2P is working well for SOE then great, fantastic. Truth be told they will never keep up with the indrustry leader's that still use P2P format. I honestly do not see P2P going anywere any time soon.

     Yeah, while i have nothing against F2P, I am more then willing to pay a sub for a good game. SOE and Smedly IMHO have made enough cluess choices in their time that nothing they make could survive except via the charity of F2P players. Everything they produce is either low quality or eventually dumbed down to low quality. Perhaps their motto should be Games by Idiots for idiots, yeah a bit harsh perhaps but then again look at their F2P model that actually cost most of their players more then a subscription (using EQ2 as a example) Can't do math? Good we want you as a customer. Sony.

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,452Member Uncommon

    of course f2p is the way to go...

    It uncaps the ceiling for how much people can pay (aka 15.99 per month), it allows a smaller amount of people to spend a larger amount of money thus allowing for other people to pay small amounts if nothing at all and yet increasing the playerbase at the same time.

    Why wouldn't they do it?

    Personally I hate the idea of people not paying their fair share but when a company says "it's ok, someone else will pay your fair share and then some, it's hard to argue.

    not for mmo's but interesting commentary nevertheless... nsfw

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6755-Breaking-the-Bones-of-Business?utm_source=latest&utm_medium=index_carousel&utm_campaign=all

  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GrayGhost79

    For sony F2P really is the only way to go with MMO's. A Pay to Play title has to have quality, polish, variety, and the ability to keep players entertained and playing 20+ hours a week for 6 months and longer. 

     

     Eeks i agree with you! (Might be a first) in any case well put. All i can add is my opinion which is simply Sony does not produce (anymore) quality games with, polish, and variety. 

  • winterwinter El Paso, TXPosts: 2,276Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by WhiteLantern
    Originally posted by Isturi

    Truth be told they will never keep up with the indrustry leader's that still use P2P format.

    To whom are you reffering?

    Blizzard? No one has, or ever will, come close to that "leader".

    CCP? PS2 has nearly twice as many people logging in every week as Eve has subs.

    Trion? See above.

    Who else should we be looking to?

     and yet only a estimated 10% of the players that log into PS2 every week spend any money. (Some more then a $15 a month sub, many less) So basically if PS2 has twice as many players as you state but only 10% as many paying then Sony is making only rouglhy 20% what CCP is. (yes i know this is very rough estimate as CCP has a a cash shop as well, and the PS2 10% PS2 players might only send a dollar or might spend $50)

       Number of players especially when the majority are not buying into the cash shop does not equal earnings, and say what you will but less earnings does mean less money put to developement, patching, and content.

  • IsturiIsturi Phoenix, AZPosts: 1,509Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath

    of course f2p is the way to go...

    It uncaps the ceiling for how much people can pay (aka 15.99 per month), it allows a smaller amount of people to spend a larger amount of money thus allowing for other people to pay small amounts if nothing at all and yet increasing the playerbase at the same time.

    Why wouldn't they do it?

    Personally I hate the idea of people not paying their fair share but when a company says "it's ok, someone else will pay your fair share and then some, it's hard to argue.

    not for mmo's but interesting commentary nevertheless... nsfw

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/6755-Breaking-the-Bones-of-Business?utm_source=latest&utm_medium=index_carousel&utm_campaign=all

    TY TY TY this video is 100% TRUTH!!!! And This is the main reason why I loath F2P MMO's or games for that matter. I just wish more people would see F2P for what it is and think about it before they spend hard earn cash into the greedy pockets of F2P games.

    image

Sign In or Register to comment.