It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by twrule
As for those of you who think paying money for a game makes a better community - keep telling yourself that to rationalize shelling out money for nothing each month. That is not at all the case, and anyone who has played WoW, or TERA, Aion, etc, when they were P2P mmos (or still are) knows that is not necessarily the case (those communities were miserable). Likewise, even if you have a greater number of casual 'passer-through' players, most games will also have a core tight-knit community that plays it; you just need to find, or (heaven forbid) create, such a community. The later type of community is likely to be such because they genuinely like the game and the people they play with, not because they are invested via psychological pressure of knowing they need to try and get their money's worth.
Sad that people who rather trot out platitudes like "you get what you pay for" just because they can't swallow the pill that they've been wasting their money.
I think it's sad that you think the small percentage of people who actually pay and pay lots should support your gaming habit.
So you will buy the box huh (if I box is offered) ? That pays for very little over the life and development of a game.
essentially small groups of people, some who should know better, shovel out tons of money to keep these games afloat while large groups of people come and go.
And that's if those people keep these games afloat. Keep in mind Aion hasn't made the money they thought it would with their f2p model.
As far as getting what you pay for, that always holds true. You are mistaken if you think that others believe a subscrtiption equals a great community.
It never has.
a subscription means a devoted or at least more serious community. People always pay for things they value and will pay for things they value greatly.
A Cello professor at BU once told me that he used to give lessons but that he had a hard time keeping students as many of his students weren't serious. He had a constantly revolving door of students amid some die hard serious students. His former teacher told him to raise fee. He did this, lost all the non-serious students, kept his serious students, attracted more serious students and learned that he could make more money with a small group of students to teach, freeing up his time for other endeavors.
That can be applied to mmo's as well. the people who pay are more devoted to a game, more serious about it. The problem with p2p games is that developers stopped giving players good reasons to keep paying those subs. Players weren't seeing what they were getting for their money. Game companies started skimping more in order to keep more money and having less events, less online gm's, less updates meant that players would get tired of just logging in for the sake of it.
That is the real lesson of p2p. If a player is going to pay something they are going to want to see something of value worth his money.
It does keep down the transient population
Originally posted by MardukkEveryone seems to love P2P in this thread. Do you still love the box price with the sub? Or just a sub is enough P2P for you? Just curious. I don't feel that I'll ever do box price and sub together ever again, short of my dream game.
Monthly sub with no box price would be my ideal model. That was the model of the first MMO I ever played (two week free trial, then you had to sub to continue), and I still think it's the best. No barrier to entry to stop people from checking out your game; but an ongoing sub to finance it.
Sadly it's not particularly popular. Although you virtually have it when the box includes a month of sub and barely costs any more than a month of sub (e.g. EVE cost I think $20 when I bought it, so basically the box cost $5).
The only distinction I make now is sub-free or sub-locked. I spend money on any game I like so b2p, f2p, freemium is pretty much the same to me. I buy premium account status when I'm focusing on a game or if it makes sense to unlock things that way.
I don't plan on renting my game access again though. That doesn't work for me anymore.
Originally posted by Dihoru Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by Dihoru get with it gents because every argument you could reasonably make against a F2P game with a balanced cash shop you can make against a P2P one as well only that the F2P game has more people playing it.
I'm still waiting for such a F2P...
Let me know when you find a p2p one. :P
i'm writing this in my eve browser.
Call me back when you donno what else to train and the only reason you log on is to chat with friends :P ( 0.0 gets boring after a few years, trust me and as for the rest... you gotta cycle it otherwise you burn out ^^ ).
you know...let's assume I agree with you.
A FEW YEARS is not that bad. I can't think of many new MMOs that can say they have a retention of A FEW YEARS.
Again, not agreeing with you, just pointing out even THAT is still not too damn bad.
Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by Dihoru get with it gents because every argument you could reasonably make against a F2P game with a balanced cash shop you can make against a P2P one as well only that the F2P game has more people playing it.
I was bored a month after beta. If there was a p2p game that I felt was worth paying for I would, right now the game I'm interested in is f2p. I still pay the $15 a month for the extras it just happens to be a f2p game.
( not at you but the thread )
I think people who sit on their high horse and say f2p is beneath them, do it because they need little things like that or they simply haven't given the good ones a chance. Either way it doesn't effect me, it's just another post on a forum
Originally posted by itgrowls pretty much confirms a long held suspicion that many on these forums alone (like me) already figured out but that many on these forums and other forums were resistant to accept even now. It's mostly due to the market and the economy however one cannot rule out the tendency for people to spend as much time in regular real life activities as much as they do in games. No longer are most people accepting the requirement by game manufacturers to spend every waking hour working towards a goal in their virtual world all for the purpose of standing in the middle of their main race's city and walking around strutting because they did something extreme like spend an entire 2-3 month period running the same dungeon/raid over and over again to learn the dance that the game developers have scripted just so they can finally and at long last get that single piece of gear to drop to complete their set. People have lives now and survival is more important then spending enormous insane amounts of time working on such things. Devs are finally starting to realize for the most part (we still have a few stragglers AHEM Anet for one) that mmo's should not be second careers when it comes to these virtual experiences.
That argument is certainly valid at your time in life. But move yourself forward 10 to 20 years, perhaps a little more. More free time, no job, kids gone, grandchildren only occasionally an issue. You just might like the idea of a game that can be played for a few hours every day. Alternately move yourself back, lots of college kids playing computer games for a few hours a day.
After all its entertainment, and given the failure in business model that TV broadcasters are facing (at least in Australia if not globally), falling viewerships leading to falling advertising revenes plus rising costs for sports broadcastng rights, so less quality and variety of enterainment programming, on-line games look more attractive. Pity about the quality of them though.
Originally posted by Sovrath Originally posted by twrule
Uhmm... dude... you need to start thinking beyond your own biases if you hope to have a chance in hell of anyone reading your posts beyond that first 4-5 lines (you do make a point towards the end that p2p devs stopped giving p2p players what they need/wanted but few are gonna read that far when you insult them from the get go).
That said you know next to nothing about the dynamics of an F2P game's payment model and what makes it great compared to P2P, yes it is a revolving door, yes some people will never pay, but to put it bluntly: I played Forsaken World, the most grindtastic MMO I've ever known on the face of the Earth for over 5 months with one of my exs and her friends and their friends, why? Because those people made it fun, once that group broke up I stopped playing. A good F2P game will have hooks for keeping people in, hooks for getting people to pay and also have ways of letting you enjoy all the content in-game without ever paying for it (hey if someone wants to sell me cryptic points for dilithium so he/she doesn't have to grind it and I can get my Kumari cruiser all the better, convinience dear chap).
Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by Dihoru Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by Dihoru get with it gents because every argument you could reasonably make against a F2P game with a balanced cash shop you can make against a P2P one as well only that the F2P game has more people playing it.
Unless they shake things up a bit the retention rate will be less because even with emergent gameplay element Goonswarm and TEST are pretty much uncontested right now, the russians have their merits but the game and the metagame as well needs to evolve or else 0.0 will just be spam supercap zones, high-sec will be carebear central and low sec will be "hot drop em with everything except the titans!" with wormholes providing benny hill style chases and pretty interesting small scale sieges.
I joined up in EVE over 7 years ago lad so trust me when I say the retention rate isn't the same, back when I started out capitals were a rare sight, interceptors were running around but to my recollection nothing else tech 2 was yet in, high-sec was a clusterfuck of high-sec alliances, mercenary pvp corps and wars were to put it bluntly not that rare and station games were even rarer, you'd see battleship squadrons supported by frigate wings moving in, interceptors dodging and weaving in "I was there" style... shit was epic no matter where you went... now it's just... meh... and it isn't just me getting jaded, the most pvp you'll see in high-sec are ganks as people generally do not engage these days without numerical superiority... well maybe the wormholers do sometimes when they're chasing down war targets in high-sec but I doubt it even then.
The shift from P2P to B2P or F2P models is a good thing, as long as variety is also kept.
My biggest gripe with P2P the past number of years is that many of the P2P games haven't been worth the 15 per month. I cut my teeth on mmos in AC1, and I paid I believe $10 per month initially. There was monthly content additions, story arcs, interesting loot system, skill based system, group and solo play, player housing, crafting, etc. That game was more than worth the price of admission. DAoC was also worth the sub because of how great the pvp was, as well as regular changes that were made.
WoW was worth the sub price for a long time, but then we come to points like between WotLK to Cataclysm, and between Cata and MoP. Where we months and months of no content additions, all developer focus was on making the expansion pack and the massive loss of subs after WotLK, during Cata, and going into MoP reflected the feelings of the community at large. Their dev cycle has slowed considerably, and even though MoP brought in a ton of things for casuals to do, the entire game still revolves around the raiding endgame. Many servers are floundering in population imbalances, and you see many folks tranferring servers just to be able to raid anymore.
Look at the numerous P2P games that have gone Freemium over the past number of years as well, and more recently games like TSW going B2P. The sub based model isn't as popular anymore, because so many of the games out there are worth the price. To top it off, many P2P mmos also have Cash Shops with exclusive items available via cash store only (the wow pet store is a great example of this).
I would say, that even though the example article in the OP does have flaws, it does show a shift in the line of thinking of gamers. Why pay 15 per month for a game that may not be better than a B2P or F2P game that is also readily available?
Like other's have said in this thread though. If the game is worth 15 per month, then people will pay to play. Unfortunately, most mmos, in my opinion, simply aren't worth it anymore.
I'm pretty sure the only way you can get to a 45 million US MMOer population is by including things that aren't MMOs like LOL and Diablo.
At which point, you might as well count BF3 and Call of Duty... which they may have...
People don't ask questions to get answers - they ask questions to show how smart they are. - Dogbert
Well hell, how could i possibly miss an opportunity to attack a segment of fellow MMO players..... seems to be a very popular activity in this thread.
Those damned dirty F2P'ers.
Moneyless flea ridden beggars everyone of them. Scum of the earth i tell ya.
Originally posted by Elikal Yeah, and cheap boyfriends who let you pay on a date surely outnumber gentlemen who invite you 6 to 1 as well, but sometimes you WAIT for quality over misers and cheapskates.
you missed the memo when equality was granted by law ?
Originally posted by Dihoru
insult? I do believe he said that he would never pay a dime on an mmo except maybe the box price. Of which, I don't know of many mmo's that only charge "a box price". Because of that "yes" I do think it's sad when people don't spend a dime on their entertainment and expect that check to be picked up by others.
I know full well how f2p games work. But I'm open to learning something so let's see if you can see a flaw in what I know.
people flock to the f2p game, a small amount of people will pay for everything under the sun, for others, they will sometimes buy things when they see somethign that's neat or something that might help them out. In this manner, with the vastly increased playerbase, smaller amounts of money are supposed to make up for the larger amount of money that a sub would cost from fewer people.
Eventually their will be churn and a new group of people will come into the system repeating the process, bringing in a steady amount of smaller purchases and becoming "content" for the die hard players who stick with the game as there are always people to talk to and group.
ok, what did I miss?
See this is what's so ass backwards with people who think their p2p game makes them something special. Many of the ppl I play with spent $200+ last month. I find that a bit crazy but whatever they want to do, it's their money.
Now who is the cheap miser...the guy that spent $15 or the guy that spent $200 ? Who's the quality woman...the one who likes to be treated like arm candy or the one who wants to pay ther own way through life ? A gentleman treats a woman with respect, it has nothing to do with paying for it.
It's almost like p2p is becoming the game type for people who need to feel special and they'll spend that $15 a month to do it gosh darn it.
I would've thought ti would have been more than just six to one.
I'm not sure what people are talking about when it comes to F2P games not being good; some of the best time I get out of MMORPGS right now are exclusively from ones that don't have monthly fees. I think it's just kind've hurting oneself to skip something due to it's payment plan. Luckily most seemed to have waken up to this and give everything a fair shot if they're able; F2P in particular brings in a lot of players who would otherwise not even give a game a second glance with the current amount of games on the market.
I'm reminded of an interview MMORPG set up with multiple MMO representatives, and one of them said they avoided WoW out of their own ego and loyalty to something else in particular. He said he was a fool to have done so, as it barred him from great experiences that could've been.
Originally posted by Sovrath ok, what did I miss?
Short version: Everything.
What you just described is a crappy F2P game which doesn't have any emergent player driven economy and is as bad as a gear treadmill/static themepark P2P game.
My strong advice: Go out there and play some F2P games without paying a dime for em, see how far you get, what sort of people you meet, etc,etc. You might just be surprised by what you find if you give it a chance (I will freely admit you will find games who will play exactly like you said but there are gems out there).
Originally posted by Boudewijns Wel imo, people that p2p, feel obligated to play the game, where people that f2p dont. And if they want to spend money on the game they will, so yeah i think that there r more fp2 then p2p gamers
I don't think you understand the meaning of obligated.
Originally posted by Gravarg I'll stick with WoW and Rift. P2P gives you an obligation to play and be loyal to a game. However, this past year, it seemed almost every P2P was so horribly launched, coded, full of lies, they all had to immediately go to F2P to try and milk thier loyal customers to at least try and get some of their money back. At least with P2P games you never see any milking, it's all voluntary junk if you want to spend more than thier sub fee.
Games dont go freemium to milk their existing customers...because the existing customers in theory keep paying their sub.
Its to attract new players, not milk the current ones
Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Elikal Yeah, and cheap boyfriends who let you pay on a date surely outnumber gentlemen who invite you 6 to 1 as well, but sometimes you WAIT for quality over misers and cheapskates.
Nonono... you got what I wanted to say all upside down.
TINSTAAFL: There is no such thing as free lunch. Words are nice and dandy, but you know that about diamonds which are a girl's best friend? If you love, don't be cheap and don't just have cheap nice words. Same with stuff. What's worth it, is worth paying for it. Nothing is ever free. It's not the sum, it's that you DO invest and DO show appreciation. I once and for all don't trust people who want stuff for free. Create a P2P barrier and only people who really appreciate will be in your MMO. F2P people hop from game to game as content locusts and don't really care about the MMO, same as a miser shows he doesn't really care about the date.
Besides, it has ALL to do with paying. Sorry, I am just done with guys who just have WORDS. Words are cheap. Let actions speak, let dedication speak, let STUFF speak. But oh no, everyone thinks today you get stuff for free and if it ain't work, you can find a place to put your freeloader ass somewhere else on the internet... NO THANKS for that mentality.
And? I don't expect anyone to support my gaming habit, and that argument doesn't work. People who don't know any better will drop tons of money in cash shops even for P2P games (like Blizzard's). The point of B2P and free to play is to offer the theoretical option that the customer not pay a dime, while some would anyway. Whether the developers properly balance their cash model to account for people's purchasing habits is not my problem as a consumer. If there was absolutely no way to keep an mmo I liked running without certain people having unhealthy habits, that's fine - I don't need to play. Anet's B2P model is an example of a nice compromise though, and seems as though it can indeed reach a proper balance.
As far as getting what you pay for, that always holds true.
As far as getting what you pay for, that always holds true.
*Chortle* Okay, sure. I need to move to wherever you live.
You are mistaken if you think that others believe a subscrtiption equals a great community. It never has.
You are mistaken if you think that others believe a subscrtiption equals a great community.
A quick look at the first page or two of this thread says some do believe that (or more precisely that there is even a strong correlation) - who were the people I was responding to.
a subscription means a devoted or at least more serious community. People always pay for things they value and will pay for things they value greatly. A Cello professor at BU once told me that he used to give lessons but that he had a hard time keeping students as many of his students weren't serious. He had a constantly revolving door of students amid some die hard serious students. His former teacher told him to raise fee. He did this, lost all the non-serious students, kept his serious students, attracted more serious students and learned that he could make more money with a small group of students to teach, freeing up his time for other endeavors. That can be applied to mmo's as well. the people who pay are more devoted to a game, more serious about it. The problem with p2p games is that developers stopped giving players good reasons to keep paying those subs. Players weren't seeing what they were getting for their money. Game companies started skimping more in order to keep more money and having less events, less online gm's, less updates meant that players would get tired of just logging in for the sake of it. That is the real lesson of p2p. If a player is going to pay something they are going to want to see something of value worth his money. It does keep down the transient population
I understand this line of thought, but I still disagree. That fact that people might be more willing to pay for the same thing than me doesn't mean I should feel obliged to pay what they do. If you can get the same thing or similar for much cheaper or free, why wouldn't you take that? If others love the game so much that they want to pay, then let them pay, and then we'll both enjoy the game, me not paying anything (for a game I otherwise would not have played), and everyone got what they wanted.
I'm sorry, but your analogy to the Cello teacher is flawed. Of course a teacher would rather have a small handful of dedicated students - but in an mmo, developers (and players) do want more traffic, even if a good portion of it is 'transient'. Players want to feel like they are in a populated world, and devs want publicity and potential direct income from those players. And since you'll have both the dedicated tight-knit community and the transient population anyway, the fact that p2p keeps transients down is no coherent argument for those who seek a tight-knit community to want a p2p game.
I have never spent any money on a FTP MMO (that started FTP) and most likely never will. As soon as the ugly cash shop with "you win" or "you now look better than someone who works hard in the game" items appear... I quit.
I play mmo's to play mmo's and earn gear and skills in game though networking, skill, and teamwork. I don't play MMO's to go to the virtual mall.
I have spent money on PoE for stash tabs, because the game is fun, the events are amusing, and the cash shop is minimal. It is also not an MMO so my above stance doesnt contradict my stance on mmo's.
I am praying for a game to have the sack to release a game saying "This will never change or you get your money back: $15 a month, no cash shop, earn your shit, dont bitch for welfare epics"
Originally posted by Dihoru Originally posted by Sovrath ok, what did I miss?
give us titles of these f2ps to try. stop telling us we're not looking in the right place but without telling us where the right place is.
"go paly some f2p games"...okay, which? there's hundreds of them. which of them should be try ?
apparently lots of subscription lovers play F2P games instead... subscription userbase keeps declining.
I only pay a sub if the game is totally worth it. And i havent seen a sub worthy mmorpg after WoW. And WoW is getting old and repetitive. B2P will always be my model of choice (personal), and if i have to pic between sub and Free i go free without commitment and if its a serious company making a AAA quality game then i support it with cash shop. AAA =/= sub
The "you get what you pay for" thing is just a ridiculous excuse to use on mmos because a sub is not the best way to go. Its a viable way if the game is worth it, thats it. A decent (non game breaking) cash shop will always give the company more money than a sub without locking people out of the game for not subbing. The problem is that pay to win companies arent serious companies so they know they will go for pay to win without caring about their games so they make low quality crap. A serious F2P company would make a AAA mmo and have a decent cash shop. Same as a B2P company.
subscribers, you can stick to your subscriptions but dont go out criticizing Free and B2P models and their playerbase because you sound like the kids you so much claim other models have. You want to criticize free models, aim for the pay to win garbage and their managers. Leave the decent ones out of it because generalizing too much tend make people look ignorant.
I know no one's gonna listen to what I say now but meh... worth a try:
15 dollars a month isn't the only way to pay for a game gents, in F2P games where cash shop currency can change hands you can, as a player, pay in a sense for the game via your time spent earning things to trade for the cash shop currency thus providing demand for said currency and in turn fueling the desire of people with less time and more money to spend their real world cash on cash shop currency and trade it in. Simple system, simple logic, works bloody well and it's why I keep going back to STO form time to time ^^.