I know it's possible because I played Street Gears and the only thing you could buy was outfits, cosmetic items.
But all other F2P games I played are ,for all intended purpose, Pay2Win games. I think it's purely greed tbh.
You've used Street Gears several times as your example, but the game went offline a while ago. While they may have sold only cosmetics, it seems it wasn't generating sustainable revenue, so are all the other guys 'purely greed' or 'smarter business model'?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Why? Well that's the core point in all of this. Speaking from a players standpoint F2P is the future, viva revolution! But.... word coming back is not so promising for this making the MMOs we love to play for free so much. Huge leap in players since the F2P boom but the revenue hasn't "clicked" yet. Time will tell.
Hasnt clicked yet?
Name me the ONLY gaming company that spent around 400 MILLION DOLLARS aquiring or buying a stake into other companies in the last 2 years.
Only one...Nexon.
In fact, only Nexon and Perfect World, two FREE 2 PLAY COMPANIES have gone on spending sprees spending almost as much money as most of the subscription based MMO gaming companies MAKE A YEAR.
Remove SoE, EA and Blizzard and Nexon makes more than the entire industry combined. 1.3 billion in revenue. Throw in PWE and they make mroe than Blizzard even outside the MMO world....on free games.
Turbine, F2P is the future. Funcom, F2P is the future. SoE, F2P is the future. EA, F2P is the future.
The only company that matters that hasnt said it publicly is Blizzard.
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
If their ccg does well and WOW goes f2p.. my god. I can see the apocalypse. The end of mmos and it is wow. And yes I'll be playing WOW just like the other half of the world.
Gdemami - Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
What these devs don't understand is that people are willing to pay for things that allow them to make their character their own. Look at The Secret World. I was *begging* for cool cosmetic things to make my character special, and their shop sucks. You can build some pretty cool looking characters, but when you look around there's still plenty of people wearing similar clothes. And where are all the hats jewelery, headphones, tatoos, and other cool, detailed stuff??
Lord of the Rings has a few good ideas, but even they don't really get it. Selling limited release mounts likely makes them a lot of money, but they could be doing so much more on the cosmetic side. I'd throw money at the screen for the right stuff. Look at their backpacks. The few custom looking ones they have are bad ass. I left the game and came back a year later and they added nothing new.
It's not that they can't make money on cosmetics, it's that they seem to be too stupid to understand what their own customers will pay money for. All they're are left with is selling pay to win stuff.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
There are statistics that say F2P as a whole is equalling P2P as a whole revenue wise. That's only half the story though isn't? Tell me, how many more players are needed to equal P2P? That statistic you link says F2P has far more players than P2P, 37m:6m right? So you need more than 6 free players to equal the same revenue as one player in a P2P. So to keep in perspective, the next time a developer says they have X% more accounts since going F2P I should expect 600%, is that correct?
It's also important to think of geography when comparing F2P/P2P. Other parts of the world, especially the east, are more apt to F2P and models that match that. Just becaus in the west the market became saturated enough to use a F2P option doesn't mean it was picked by choice. It was a reaction.
Best case scenerio it's still too early to tell. Right now the statistics show me that not enough people pay to make F2P ideal for a game that could be P2P. Please keep in mind I'm not considering cheap or lobby arena games. In neither instance do to think they could charge a sub so thu would be F2P by default.
And to reinderate, I don't dislike F2P nor do I think it's going away. A lot of companies, such as SoE are adding F2P to a sub option. F2P by itself however does not look promising for delivering a quality MMO. Many arena/topic MMOs may come out though.
F2p games always seem to degrade iinto one of two things:
1) p2win or p2get ahead (selling gear with good stats or selling exp boosts).
2) RNG gambling aka pay for a random chance to get some p2win item or advantage (keys for treasure boxes, lockboxes, or crafting success enhancements)
Is it possible to make an F2P where you dont result in ultimately granting a person an advantage?
I honest to god do not see why this matters? There are costs incolved in maintaining a game to which money is required. If they cannot get enough people to play via subscription, or wish to avoid it all together then yes, their F2P content will include items which are most desireable in order for them to pay the bills.
I should also make a remark that I have simply not played a game where the 'best' gear is exclusive only to a games item shop.
I have to ask, intelligently to others as to why Pay to win is such a bad thing, and why it is demonised? I mean from OPs post, they say an 'advantage' but, there is no 'advantage' to be had. Someone who spends time rather than money to aquire items of the same quality is not an 'advantage' but just two differen't means of payment to get the items required.
You also cannot make the arguement that the person who buys gets the item immediately and the person who spends the time to earn his item is therfore penalised because the time difference creates this 'advantage'. I will now explain as to why, now just to ensure my 'words' are not minced against me I have got the literal dictionary meaning of the word "any state, circumstance, opportunity, or means specially favorable to success, interest, or any desired end: the advantage of a good education". Now, buying gear and earning gear does not create any favour to success because both roads lead to the exact place and the only difference is the 'currency' used to achieve that end i.e. time and money.
Do you see where I am going with this? There is no advantage in place!
What I will say however is that it is unacceptable for games to 'groom' or 'stylise' a playstyle via monetisation. Essentially what I mean by this is a game company which pretty much guts their interface or in-game facilities to then sell back to you to 'enhance' your gaming experience. I really hate when companies bastardised their community with crap like that, with the mentality of "Well you CAN play for free, but we aren't happy about it so we will make the gaming experience so infuriating that you will either leave or get on board".
At the end of the day, I understand as do you understand that those who opt for free to play models need to pay the bills. There is nothing about 'greed' in there, it is, what it is and if you don't mind putting labour of love into your chosen MMO then why does it matter if someone buys something to play the game? If you have the ability to sink 30 hours a week into gaming but a businessman might only soak 7 hours a week, then its up to that guy if he wants to catch up by paying so he can continue to play with his friends or get into raiding quicker. It doesn't harm you in any manner.
In closing, myself, personally am a kind of guy that would rather sink the time into the game and I don't mind being behind the curve as I enjoy the content. I do happily support via cosmetics F2P games I feel attached to, such as TSW. But as a time over money kinda guy that I am, I have never ever EVER played a F2P game and thought to myself 'Those bastards! Buying into this game that I am playing!' and the reason I haven't is... because nothing they do stops me enjoying the game and grouping with others. literally nothing. To me, they simply don't exist until I group with them and even then I don't even know that they have. Nor do I care.
Sorry for the long post, but if someone has an examples as to where Pay to Win is negative to a game and your personal enjoyment. I would LOVE to hear it, no sarcasm, I am actually interested. Please make the arguement relevant, so, the game has to still exist and be played on, how it impacts you and how others have an advantage over you?
Why? Well that's the core point in all of this. Speaking from a players standpoint F2P is the future, viva revolution! But.... word coming back is not so promising for this making the MMOs we love to play for free so much. Huge leap in players since the F2P boom but the revenue hasn't "clicked" yet. Time will tell.
Hasnt clicked yet?
Name me the ONLY gaming company that spent around 400 MILLION DOLLARS aquiring or buying a stake into other companies in the last 2 years.
Only one...Nexon.
In fact, only Nexon and Perfect World, two FREE 2 PLAY COMPANIES have gone on spending sprees spending almost as much money as most of the subscription based MMO gaming companies MAKE A YEAR.
Remove SoE, EA and Blizzard and Nexon makes more than the entire industry combined. 1.3 billion in revenue. Throw in PWE and they make mroe than Blizzard even outside the MMO world....on free games.
Turbine, F2P is the future. Funcom, F2P is the future. SoE, F2P is the future. EA, F2P is the future.
The only company that matters that hasnt said it publicly is Blizzard.
Yes, we know... Korea, and F2P are the future of gaming... Nexon has one of the worst reputations in the gaming industry. Even worse than NCsoft and SOE. I'd hardly consider them being involved in something a glowing recommendation.
As for PWE, I like some of their games, but others are little more than the typical re ruled, repurposed shovel ware, that we've all seen way too much of. While F2P is simply a different business model, many of those using it are guilty of seriously abusing it.
It's also important to think of geography when comparing F2P/P2P. Other parts of the world, especially the east, are more apt to F2P and models that match that. Just becaus in the west the market became saturated enough to use a F2P option doesn't mean it was picked by choice. It was a reaction.
There is another reason why P2P games are less popular in Asia: because many more people, as a percentage, go play their games at internet cafe's / PC bangs / college comp labs. Why? Because personal computer ownership rates are much higher in the West, and, living space is a lot tighter in places like Taiwan, S.Korea, and mainland Chinese cities (i.e. where most of the people that play these games are). And not all PC bangs are going to buy 30-50 copies of every P2P game that comes out. So when the "kids" want to play their games, they get out of the house. go the Pc cafe and play their F2P game. So, again, outside conditions and different societal norms are part of the reasons that F2Ps do so much better in Asia.
Why? Well that's the core point in all of this. Speaking from a players standpoint F2P is the future, viva revolution! But.... word coming back is not so promising for this making the MMOs we love to play for free so much. Huge leap in players since the F2P boom but the revenue hasn't "clicked" yet. Time will tell.
Hasnt clicked yet?
Name me the ONLY gaming company that spent around 400 MILLION DOLLARS aquiring or buying a stake into other companies in the last 2 years.
Only one...Nexon.
In fact, only Nexon and Perfect World, two FREE 2 PLAY COMPANIES have gone on spending sprees spending almost as much money as most of the subscription based MMO gaming companies MAKE A YEAR.
Remove SoE, EA and Blizzard and Nexon makes more than the entire industry combined. 1.3 billion in revenue. Throw in PWE and they make mroe than Blizzard even outside the MMO world....on free games.
Turbine, F2P is the future. Funcom, F2P is the future. SoE, F2P is the future. EA, F2P is the future.
The only company that matters that hasnt said it publicly is Blizzard.
Yeah, "hasn't clicked yet" is definitely not the most accurate description there. :0
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Lol, it was a little too general much like "F2P is the future". The future of what? A lot of eastern games that Burntvet pointed out was popular for specific reasons? Low cost moba or MMOFPS games? TCG games like Hearthstone. Sure, I completly agree on those counts.
It was my mistake for not clarifying, I'm speaking specifically about fully featured quality MMOs. In this regard I do not think a strictly F2P model can deliver like a P2P can. Sub with F2P option? Sure. Of any game out or coming out I think EQN will be the "next gen" MMO and it should have a free play option. I think F2P is "the future" of many online games but not all of them and specifically ones I like to play.
I'm speaking specifically about fully featured quality MMOs. In this regard I do not think a strictly F2P model can deliver like a P2P can.
I think they can, as GW2 has shown devs that they can charge for the client to recoup development money up front, and then follow on with a free to play model thereafter.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Path of Exile, League of Legends, and Bloodline Champions are the only F2P games that I felt were worth playing because they greatly eliminated the 'Pay to Win' aspect. Tribes Ascend could also be added to this list.
I agree, a couple million box sales can certainly set you up for a cash shop continuance to F2P... unless they charge for any future xpacs. How many times can that be copied? Being "the future" implies it can work for more than one or even a few titles. I do like the GW2 model though to be honest I'd much prefer to pay a sub and get the game for "free".
I agree, a couple million box sales can certainly set you up for a cash shop continuance to F2P... unless they charge for any future xpacs. How many times can that be copied? Being "the future" implies it can work for more than one or even a few titles. I do like the GW2 model though to be honest I'd much prefer to pay a sub and get the game for "free".
Why wouldn't it work for more titles? The charge for the client is the missing piece of the F2P puzzle to get publishers and investors on board. Anomolies and freakish viral messaging aside, any MMO that's looking to bring in several hundred thousand players at release is going to need to tack on a half a million or more in advertising to pull that off. Having some kind of pre-release income like a box or client charge puts a nice dent in that and then some.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Let's say you're right, and for most full featured MMOs I'd agree with you, charging for the client is not F2P, which was my point.
I was arguing against F2P being the future of all MMOs. So I agree with you, B2P is a feasible model for making and releasing an MMO that can sustain itself. You would still need a good initial sales of course or you may come into the same problem as F2P titles.
Originally posted by Aelious There are statistics that say F2P as a whole is equalling P2P as a whole revenue wise. That's only half the story though isn't? Tell me, how many more players are needed to equal P2P? That statistic you link says F2P has far more players than P2P, 37m:6m right? So you need more than 6 free players to equal the same revenue as one player in a P2P. So to keep in perspective, the next time a developer says they have X% more accounts since going F2P I should expect 600%, is that correct?
Of course the average is not always true for a specific game. A game can increase players only 300% but increase revenue more than the 1 to 6 ratio. On average, you are right. F2P is making as much money as P2P, and F2P players outnumbered P2P by 6 to 1.
That is not the whole story. If you look at the trend, the numbers are even going to be more in flavor of F2P in the future.
And many games do announce a lot more revenue after turning F2P (DDO, LOTRO ...).
It's also important to think of geography when comparing F2P/P2P. Other parts of the world, especially the east, are more apt to F2P and models that match that. Just becaus in the west the market became saturated enough to use a F2P option doesn't mean it was picked by choice. It was a reaction.
The 50% revenue share number is for the US 2012. Thus in the US, F2P is already making as much money as P2P and probably more in 2012.
Best case scenerio it's still too early to tell. Right now the statistics show me that not enough people pay to make F2P ideal for a game that could be P2P. Please keep in mind I'm not considering cheap or lobby arena games. In neither instance do to think they could charge a sub so thu would be F2P by default.
How do you get that? The trend was there for the last 2-3 years. And why do you say "not enough people to pay"? As long as there are whales who pays a lot, the number of people paying is not a problem.
Originally posted by Aelious Let's say you're right, and for most full featured MMOs I'd agree with you, charging for the client is not F2P, which was my point.
I was arguing against F2P being the future of all MMOs. So I agree with you, B2P is a feasible model for making and releasing an MMO that can sustain itself. You would still need a good initial sales of course or you may come into the same problem as F2P titles.
How?
Aren't more and more MMOs going F2P or developed as F2P?
As more competition is launched that 6:1 ratio is going to hurt F2P a lot more than P2P since the players are more apt to wander. You'll just have to see for yourself I guess. It doesn't really matter to me as I don't mind paying for good entertainment.
Comments
May be not for you. I found many F2P games enjoyable.
You've used Street Gears several times as your example, but the game went offline a while ago. While they may have sold only cosmetics, it seems it wasn't generating sustainable revenue, so are all the other guys 'purely greed' or 'smarter business model'?
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Hasnt clicked yet?
Name me the ONLY gaming company that spent around 400 MILLION DOLLARS aquiring or buying a stake into other companies in the last 2 years.
Only one...Nexon.
In fact, only Nexon and Perfect World, two FREE 2 PLAY COMPANIES have gone on spending sprees spending almost as much money as most of the subscription based MMO gaming companies MAKE A YEAR.
Remove SoE, EA and Blizzard and Nexon makes more than the entire industry combined. 1.3 billion in revenue. Throw in PWE and they make mroe than Blizzard even outside the MMO world....on free games.
Turbine, F2P is the future. Funcom, F2P is the future. SoE, F2P is the future. EA, F2P is the future.
The only company that matters that hasnt said it publicly is Blizzard.
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
Blizz is trying F2P in their online CCG. They are probably thinking about it for Titan.
F2P is the future.
Gdemami -
Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.
I've never thought of EXP boosts as a 'cheat' or whatever. Uber Gear, etc that is P2W... XP boosts, I really don't think it falls in the P2W category.
Marvel Heroes is also using the LoL model.
What these devs don't understand is that people are willing to pay for things that allow them to make their character their own. Look at The Secret World. I was *begging* for cool cosmetic things to make my character special, and their shop sucks. You can build some pretty cool looking characters, but when you look around there's still plenty of people wearing similar clothes. And where are all the hats jewelery, headphones, tatoos, and other cool, detailed stuff??
Lord of the Rings has a few good ideas, but even they don't really get it. Selling limited release mounts likely makes them a lot of money, but they could be doing so much more on the cosmetic side. I'd throw money at the screen for the right stuff. Look at their backpacks. The few custom looking ones they have are bad ass. I left the game and came back a year later and they added nothing new.
It's not that they can't make money on cosmetics, it's that they seem to be too stupid to understand what their own customers will pay money for. All they're are left with is selling pay to win stuff.
A sure sign that you are in an old, dying paradigm/mindset, is when you are scared of new ideas and new technology. Don't feel bad. The world is moving on without you, and you are welcome to yell "Get Off My Lawn!" all you want while it happens. You cannot, however, stop an idea whose time has come.
It's also important to think of geography when comparing F2P/P2P. Other parts of the world, especially the east, are more apt to F2P and models that match that. Just becaus in the west the market became saturated enough to use a F2P option doesn't mean it was picked by choice. It was a reaction.
Best case scenerio it's still too early to tell. Right now the statistics show me that not enough people pay to make F2P ideal for a game that could be P2P. Please keep in mind I'm not considering cheap or lobby arena games. In neither instance do to think they could charge a sub so thu would be F2P by default.
I honest to god do not see why this matters? There are costs incolved in maintaining a game to which money is required. If they cannot get enough people to play via subscription, or wish to avoid it all together then yes, their F2P content will include items which are most desireable in order for them to pay the bills.
I should also make a remark that I have simply not played a game where the 'best' gear is exclusive only to a games item shop.
I have to ask, intelligently to others as to why Pay to win is such a bad thing, and why it is demonised? I mean from OPs post, they say an 'advantage' but, there is no 'advantage' to be had. Someone who spends time rather than money to aquire items of the same quality is not an 'advantage' but just two differen't means of payment to get the items required.
You also cannot make the arguement that the person who buys gets the item immediately and the person who spends the time to earn his item is therfore penalised because the time difference creates this 'advantage'. I will now explain as to why, now just to ensure my 'words' are not minced against me I have got the literal dictionary meaning of the word "any state, circumstance, opportunity, or means specially favorable to success, interest, or any desired end: the advantage of a good education". Now, buying gear and earning gear does not create any favour to success because both roads lead to the exact place and the only difference is the 'currency' used to achieve that end i.e. time and money.
Do you see where I am going with this? There is no advantage in place!
What I will say however is that it is unacceptable for games to 'groom' or 'stylise' a playstyle via monetisation. Essentially what I mean by this is a game company which pretty much guts their interface or in-game facilities to then sell back to you to 'enhance' your gaming experience. I really hate when companies bastardised their community with crap like that, with the mentality of "Well you CAN play for free, but we aren't happy about it so we will make the gaming experience so infuriating that you will either leave or get on board".
At the end of the day, I understand as do you understand that those who opt for free to play models need to pay the bills. There is nothing about 'greed' in there, it is, what it is and if you don't mind putting labour of love into your chosen MMO then why does it matter if someone buys something to play the game? If you have the ability to sink 30 hours a week into gaming but a businessman might only soak 7 hours a week, then its up to that guy if he wants to catch up by paying so he can continue to play with his friends or get into raiding quicker. It doesn't harm you in any manner.
In closing, myself, personally am a kind of guy that would rather sink the time into the game and I don't mind being behind the curve as I enjoy the content. I do happily support via cosmetics F2P games I feel attached to, such as TSW. But as a time over money kinda guy that I am, I have never ever EVER played a F2P game and thought to myself 'Those bastards! Buying into this game that I am playing!' and the reason I haven't is... because nothing they do stops me enjoying the game and grouping with others. literally nothing. To me, they simply don't exist until I group with them and even then I don't even know that they have. Nor do I care.
Sorry for the long post, but if someone has an examples as to where Pay to Win is negative to a game and your personal enjoyment. I would LOVE to hear it, no sarcasm, I am actually interested. Please make the arguement relevant, so, the game has to still exist and be played on, how it impacts you and how others have an advantage over you?
Thanking you.
Yes, we know... Korea, and F2P are the future of gaming... Nexon has one of the worst reputations in the gaming industry. Even worse than NCsoft and SOE. I'd hardly consider them being involved in something a glowing recommendation.
As for PWE, I like some of their games, but others are little more than the typical re ruled, repurposed shovel ware, that we've all seen way too much of. While F2P is simply a different business model, many of those using it are guilty of seriously abusing it.
There is another reason why P2P games are less popular in Asia: because many more people, as a percentage, go play their games at internet cafe's / PC bangs / college comp labs. Why? Because personal computer ownership rates are much higher in the West, and, living space is a lot tighter in places like Taiwan, S.Korea, and mainland Chinese cities (i.e. where most of the people that play these games are). And not all PC bangs are going to buy 30-50 copies of every P2P game that comes out. So when the "kids" want to play their games, they get out of the house. go the Pc cafe and play their F2P game. So, again, outside conditions and different societal norms are part of the reasons that F2Ps do so much better in Asia.Yeah, "hasn't clicked yet" is definitely not the most accurate description there. :0
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
It was my mistake for not clarifying, I'm speaking specifically about fully featured quality MMOs. In this regard I do not think a strictly F2P model can deliver like a P2P can. Sub with F2P option? Sure. Of any game out or coming out I think EQN will be the "next gen" MMO and it should have a free play option. I think F2P is "the future" of many online games but not all of them and specifically ones I like to play.
I think they can, as GW2 has shown devs that they can charge for the client to recoup development money up front, and then follow on with a free to play model thereafter.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Path of Exile, League of Legends, and Bloodline Champions are the only F2P games that I felt were worth playing because they greatly eliminated the 'Pay to Win' aspect. Tribes Ascend could also be added to this list.
I agree, a couple million box sales can certainly set you up for a cash shop continuance to F2P... unless they charge for any future xpacs. How many times can that be copied? Being "the future" implies it can work for more than one or even a few titles. I do like the GW2 model though to be honest I'd much prefer to pay a sub and get the game for "free".
Why wouldn't it work for more titles? The charge for the client is the missing piece of the F2P puzzle to get publishers and investors on board. Anomolies and freakish viral messaging aside, any MMO that's looking to bring in several hundred thousand players at release is going to need to tack on a half a million or more in advertising to pull that off. Having some kind of pre-release income like a box or client charge puts a nice dent in that and then some.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
I was arguing against F2P being the future of all MMOs. So I agree with you, B2P is a feasible model for making and releasing an MMO that can sustain itself. You would still need a good initial sales of course or you may come into the same problem as F2P titles.
How?
Aren't more and more MMOs going F2P or developed as F2P?
Are F2P taking more revenue share of the market?
Are there more players playign F2P MMO than P2P?
gw2-neverwinter-poe-tsw thos gamer have micros. and dont give any advantage at all
As more competition is launched that 6:1 ratio is going to hurt F2P a lot more than P2P since the players are more apt to wander. You'll just have to see for yourself I guess. It doesn't really matter to me as I don't mind paying for good entertainment.