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!

F2P Model heading for disaster an "apocalypse" in 3-5 years

1789101113»

Comments

  • KappenWizKappenWiz Pittsburgh, PAPosts: 162Member
    Luckily, it looks like this thread will still be going 3-5 years from now, so we'll be able to declare a winner.
  • VorthanionVorthanion Laguna Vista, TXPosts: 2,121Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi

     


    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi  

    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Rthuth434

    Originally posted by Vorthanion I sure hope this buisiness model collapses.  I'm tired of the crappy quality games that have resulted from this movement.
    are you also tired of all the crappy quality P2P MMO's that continue to release?
    I'll take subscription based SWTOR over any of the current F2P pieces of garbage anyday.  
      How did f2p change the content of the game ?
    It was designed for subscription, which means it had a higher quality development than those I have played that were F2P from the start

     

    Really ? what games would that be ?

    I find it a lot higher in quality than Neverwinter or Planetside 2 or any of the plethora of asian F2P monstrosities.  I don't know about Archeage, it may start off as F2P or not, but the jury is still out on whether it's of high quality or not.  As far as I know, Wildstar is starting as subscription as will EverQuest Next and Elder Scrolls Online.  All three of which look good on paper, but we'll see.  The potential already looks better than most games built for F2P from the start.

    Everquest Next is f2p. The payment models of Wildstar and TESO are currently unknown.

    I highly doubt that.  At the least, it will be a freemium game.  They've invested way too much money, far beyond what they put into Planetside 2, to go strictly F2P.

    image
  • Dren_UtogiDren_Utogi OuterSpacePosts: 1,714Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi

     


    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi  

    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Rthuth434

    Originally posted by Vorthanion I sure hope this buisiness model collapses.  I'm tired of the crappy quality games that have resulted from this movement.
    are you also tired of all the crappy quality P2P MMO's that continue to release?
    I'll take subscription based SWTOR over any of the current F2P pieces of garbage anyday.  
      How did f2p change the content of the game ?
    It was designed for subscription, which means it had a higher quality development than those I have played that were F2P from the start

     

    Really ? what games would that be ?

    I find it a lot higher in quality than Neverwinter or Planetside 2 or any of the plethora of asian F2P monstrosities.  I don't know about Archeage, it may start off as F2P or not, but the jury is still out on whether it's of high quality or not.  As far as I know, Wildstar is starting as subscription as will EverQuest Next and Elder Scrolls Online.  All three of which look good on paper, but we'll see.  The potential already looks better than most games built for F2P from the start.

    Everquest Next is f2p. The payment models of Wildstar and TESO are currently unknown.

    I highly doubt that.  At the least, it will be a freemium game.  They've invested way too much money, far beyond what they put into Planetside 2, to go strictly F2P.

    How much money have they invested ?

    The one thing that an article like MJ;s does is a chess move as well. Try to get some competitors to rethink their stradegy with freemuim and f2p content that could cripple them if they try and make a change cause the great words of wisdom came from the heavens... and leave the door open for a CU payed  to play game.

     

    It is all just to ironic that in his interview he didnt rule out the freemuim plan .

    reviews are !@#$ing stupid. Play what you love.

  • DihoruDihoru ConstantaPosts: 2,731Member
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi

     


    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi  

    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Rthuth434

    Originally posted by Vorthanion I sure hope this buisiness model collapses.  I'm tired of the crappy quality games that have resulted from this movement.
    are you also tired of all the crappy quality P2P MMO's that continue to release?
    I'll take subscription based SWTOR over any of the current F2P pieces of garbage anyday.  
      How did f2p change the content of the game ?
    It was designed for subscription, which means it had a higher quality development than those I have played that were F2P from the start

     

    Really ? what games would that be ?

    I find it a lot higher in quality than Neverwinter or Planetside 2 or any of the plethora of asian F2P monstrosities.  I don't know about Archeage, it may start off as F2P or not, but the jury is still out on whether it's of high quality or not.  As far as I know, Wildstar is starting as subscription as will EverQuest Next and Elder Scrolls Online.  All three of which look good on paper, but we'll see.  The potential already looks better than most games built for F2P from the start.

    Everquest Next is f2p. The payment models of Wildstar and TESO are currently unknown.

    I highly doubt that.  At the least, it will be a freemium game.  They've invested way too much money, far beyond what they put into Planetside 2, to go strictly F2P.

    Actually most people reckon EQN will be F2P in a similar vein to Vanguard (no real restrictions besides 1-2 points which will get people interested in subbing and EQN can pull this off because it has similar clout in the market as WoW had at launch) while Wildstar and TESO are most likely gonna be B2P with cash shop like GW2.

     

    I will state this much about the P2P fanatics running around in here trying to make it sound like a way better model than F2P because of x,y,z without any credible (and preferably ample) proof: The only game which is P2P which is growing at this moment is EVE-Online, a FFA PVP, full-loss/partial loot space game that's a full on MMO sandbox where outside of High Security space you can run into some pretty weird and wonderful (or horrific) things. The fact that game even 10 years down the line is gaining sub numbers should tell people just what kind of game is viable with the P2P system post-"I don't have to pay to play shitty games because there are exactly the same type of shitty games free to play!" revelation. By what I've read CU will sink as a P2P game because its PVP aspect is restricted to Hell (RvRvR, whereas in EVE you could have schisms in corporations, guilds, which lead to basically civil war within that guild) and back and the sandbox elements aren't there much.

     

    I get what MJ and his fans would want, a rebirth of DAoC basically with more odds and ends strapped on, but to think CU would work in the MMO landscape in 3-5 years as a P2P is... delluded, we've got so many options already and more are on the way this year alone (Hell I am looking towards Archeage personally and thinking: if the devs play their cards right that'll be the next EVE-level game). In 3-5 years Embers of Caerus will likely be out, EVE-Online would've cemented it's grip on its niche further with iterations and expansions on current systems (more 0.0 space is innevitable, the summer expansion is set to mix up things from an explorations stand point again and if it is like Apocrypha then a portion of space will again become like the Wild West), World of Darkness might be well into closed beta stages by then, EQN will at the very least be on the near horizon,etc. Now you may say: But most of those don't have a declared payment model or are P2P! and I say: exactly, if all those games are P2P and are good enough to retain their subscribers then CU will face a crippling lack of initial subbers.

     

    image
  • ShaighShaigh Posts: 547Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Dihoru

    I will state this much about the P2P fanatics running around in here trying to make it sound like a way better model than F2P because of x,y,z without any credible (and preferably ample) proof: The only game which is P2P which is growing at this moment is EVE-Online, a FFA PVP, full-loss/partial loot space game that's a full on MMO sandbox where outside of High Security space you can run into some pretty weird and wonderful (or horrific) things. The fact that game even 10 years down the line is gaining sub numbers should tell people just what kind of game is viable with the P2P system post-"I don't have to pay to play shitty games because there are exactly the same type of shitty games free to play!" revelation. 

    Let's change this to checkout f2p/b2p MMOs and the behaviour those games have beyond the three months after launch/conversion. GW2 and PS2 had the exact same player behaviour as a P2P game during launch, TSW, tera, swtor had a big increase in amount of players when it converted to f2p/b2p and is shrinking now, DDO and lotro, the two games that has been most hyped due to f2p no longer have that magical push with more players now.

     

    There is no miracle system that creates an evergrowing playerbase.

  • TaldierTaldier Camp Hill, PAPosts: 235Member
    Originally posted by Dihoru

     I will state this much about the P2P fanatics running around in here trying to make it sound like a way better model than F2P because of x,y,z without any credible (and preferably ample) proof: The only game which is P2P which is growing at this moment is EVE-Online, a FFA PVP, full-loss/partial loot space game that's a full on MMO sandbox where outside of High Security space you can run into some pretty weird and wonderful (or horrific) things. The fact that game even 10 years down the line is gaining sub numbers should tell people just what kind of game is viable with the P2P system post-"I don't have to pay to play shitty games because there are exactly the same type of shitty games free to play!" revelation. By what I've read CU will sink as a P2P game because its PVP aspect is restricted to Hell (RvRvR, whereas in EVE you could have schisms in corporations, guilds, which lead to basically civil war within that guild) and back and the sandbox elements aren't there much...

    To start with, nobody has said that P2P is inherently a better model than F2P.  This entire thread has been the other way around with F2P fanatics saying that no P2P games are ever allowed to made again forever.

    We have said that P2P is a better model for us for a specific game that we want to play.

    The F2P zealots are the ones intentionally coming onto subforums set up for a game that has been specifically stated to not be F2P and saying "this sucks because its not what I want".

     

    The sandbox enviornment of EVE is very interesting, but its a completely different game.  Its basically a different genre from fantasy RPG's and I personally just dont have an attraction to the EVE setting.

    CU is the most interesting concept we've been presented as a fantasy based PvP MMORPG.  If it is really successful, I could see that eventually leading to a full PvP alternate ruleset server as well just like it did for DAOC.

  • XarnthalXarnthal Landenberg, PAPosts: 130Member
    Originally posted by MarkJacobs
    Originally posted by Mtibbs1989
     

     Do I think F2P will have an apocalyptic outcome in 3-5 years? absolutely not. It's a model that has been around for almost as long as the P2P model.

     

    Is it possible that some of our disagreement is simply over the fact that when I used the word apocalypse, it was to describe what was going to happen to the developers/publishers? I know that F2P isn't going away anytime soon. I used that term to describe all the studios that were going to be shut down because that there will be too many of them turning out too much expensive content, all chasing the same customers.

    Anyway, time to hit the sack. I enjoyed the exchange. Cya!

    ugh, this is one of those things that really turn people off MJ! You should know this already going into making a niche game, you're not chasing all "MMO Customers" you're chasing a select group of MMO players. I hope you realize this rather than just stating it. The people who play DAoC are different from those who play EQ1. The ones who play PlanetSide2 are different from WoW.

    I think this is the giant leap of logic in your analysis on the F2P model, assuming that all MMO companies(which by your definition includes yours) are targetting the same players. You're attempting to make a niche PvP-only game that targets group PvP players, but you're not dealing with the same customers who play Darkfall which is also a PvP-only game, except designed more for world domination and is a first person shooter.

    The more I read your posts the more I feel like you are just ignoring some of the customer base, just like you did in DAoC. You're targetting the masses of interest in the game, rather than the niche core who you think you're enticing.

     

     

     

    Sennheiser
    Assist
    Thage

  • TaldierTaldier Camp Hill, PAPosts: 235Member
    Originally posted by Xarnthal
    Originally posted by MarkJacobs
    Originally posted by Mtibbs1989
     

     Do I think F2P will have an apocalyptic outcome in 3-5 years? absolutely not. It's a model that has been around for almost as long as the P2P model.

     

    Is it possible that some of our disagreement is simply over the fact that when I used the word apocalypse, it was to describe what was going to happen to the developers/publishers? I know that F2P isn't going away anytime soon. I used that term to describe all the studios that were going to be shut down because that there will be too many of them turning out too much expensive content, all chasing the same customers.

    Anyway, time to hit the sack. I enjoyed the exchange. Cya!

    ugh, this is one of those things that really turn people off MJ! You should know this already going into making a niche game, you're not chasing all "MMO Customers" you're chasing a select group of MMO players. I hope you realize this rather than just stating it. The people who play DAoC are different from those who play EQ1. The ones who play PlanetSide2 are different from WoW.

    I think this is the giant leap of logic in your analysis on the F2P model, assuming that all MMO companies(which by your definition includes yours) are targetting the same players. You're attempting to make a niche PvP-only game that targets group PvP players, but you're not dealing with the same customers who play Darkfall which is also a PvP-only game, except designed more for world domination and is a first person shooter.

    The more I read your posts the more I feel like you are just ignoring some of the customer base, just like you did in DAoC. You're targetting the masses of interest in the game, rather than the niche core who you think you're enticing.

    I'm not sure what you are talking about or how you could have possibly gotten anything like that from his post.

    He said that a lot of those F2P games are all chasing the same customers.  Which is just a fact.  Many of the worst ones are even literally clones of each other.

    Thats not saying anything about CU which is going after a totally different audience, hence why its using a different business model.

  • ice-vortexice-vortex Xenia, OHPosts: 951Member
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by ice-vortex
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi

     


    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Dren_Utogi  

    Originally posted by Vorthanion

    Originally posted by Rthuth434

    Originally posted by Vorthanion I sure hope this buisiness model collapses.  I'm tired of the crappy quality games that have resulted from this movement.
    are you also tired of all the crappy quality P2P MMO's that continue to release?
    I'll take subscription based SWTOR over any of the current F2P pieces of garbage anyday.  
      How did f2p change the content of the game ?
    It was designed for subscription, which means it had a higher quality development than those I have played that were F2P from the start

     

    Really ? what games would that be ?

    I find it a lot higher in quality than Neverwinter or Planetside 2 or any of the plethora of asian F2P monstrosities.  I don't know about Archeage, it may start off as F2P or not, but the jury is still out on whether it's of high quality or not.  As far as I know, Wildstar is starting as subscription as will EverQuest Next and Elder Scrolls Online.  All three of which look good on paper, but we'll see.  The potential already looks better than most games built for F2P from the start.

    Everquest Next is f2p. The payment models of Wildstar and TESO are currently unknown.

    I highly doubt that.  At the least, it will be a freemium game.  They've invested way too much money, far beyond what they put into Planetside 2, to go strictly F2P.


    Uh, it is going to be f2p.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=wVIIIZ6ETtY#t=284s

  • KhinRuniteKhinRunite ManilaPosts: 879Member
    Originally posted by Tierless

    I think MMORPGers, the old school core ones are smart enough to ignore these silly things. Give us cash or you can't have a bank slot! It's getting sickening. So I buy the product, then I pay you again to "unlock" all the stuff inside. WTF.

     

    [mod edit]

    Both models cater to different type of gamers. You don't get to be the "smarter" one because you preferred one or the other.

    Old timers tend to have the mindset of "I want everything accessible in my game!". F2P doesn't work for these people because they'll end up spending more.

    However, there are gamers who are fine not unlocking everything, and see more merit in just buying features when they really need them. For these types of players, F2P is the better choice because it is possible for them to not spend a single dime for months, and in some MMOs, they tend to not spend anything at all.

     

    [mod edit]

  • CelciusCelcius Posts: 1,001Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Vorthanion
    Originally posted by Alders
    Originally posted by Celcius
    Originally posted by Fearum
    Originally posted by Celcius
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    We will see if his prediction is right. I predict exactly the opposite. F2P/B2P will flourish and P2P will die out with WoW.

    I predict you are half right. I think the whole genre is going to be in trouble by then.

    Business models are not the issue. pisspoor quality MMORPGs are the issue. Create a quality product and people will pay for it. Once you have a quality product, you can then figure out the best business model. But we can all see how dollar signs have driven this industry since the (anomalous) success of WoW. Developers have lost sight of why gamers play and have zeroed in on their wallets. It shows.

    MMORPGs weren't originally mainstream games. I believe they will eventually either die out or return to their roots. I also think there will be forks. Gw2 could potentially be the pioneer to such a fork....A hybrization from action games. But in the end, I don't think they will be what we call(ed) MMORPGs

    There has not been too many good MMOs for sure. You are right, but I think we are reaching the tail end of that cycle. GW2 has been a huge success -- the biggest since WoW-- and is seeing more initial success then WoW did initially as well. A big reason for this is the B2P model. I think that is the direction "AAA" quality MMOs will go. Games like TESO and Wildstar look to be promising. I think that the future of this genre is fine, but I also think that there will be more quality games coming. From my current perspective the only thing that could screw up TESO and Wildstar at this point is...a sub model.

    I think your wrong and the millions of players still playing WoW agree. People don't care what the pay model is as long as the game is good and keeps them playing. Your trying to factor in this current crop of failed mmo's that had to go to F2P to try and recoup some of the money they lost from bad decisions, yes there will always be a few die hard fans that stick around buying stuff from the cash shops, but doesnt that make the game a niche game?

    B2P is a funny model, your basically paying a box price for a F2P model game. Now you say that was a huge success, how are you judgeing this huge success? It might have been from launch, but this genre isnt about quick money making titles, it used to be a marathon and about longevity.

    The millions of people playing WoW are playing WoW because they have been playing it forever. They are commited to the game, invested to it, and that won't go away anytime soon. As far as the rest of us who play other --newer games, this is not the case. The rest of the industry (which at this point is far bigger then WoW) is constantly jumping from game to game. There are a few who stick around with their sub based MMOs, but for the most part they are sticking with F2P / B2P games. GW2 is a huge success and you are just blinding yourself with World of Warcraft if you can't see this. Just look up some NC Soft earnings reports. They are making the company more money then ever because of it. 

    Your ignorance of the B2P model is apparent here. A f2p game restricts you, alot of times on content, whereas a B2P game does not. You buy GW2 and you get the whole game. You don't have to pay a cent. You can see and play all the content there is completely for free. That is not a F2P model. F2P models restrict your ability to play the game the way you want to or restrict the amount of content available to you. 

    The fact that they lost subs, once again, after an expansion launched shows just how well that game is doing. Honestly, the game is going to continue to lose subs every quarter just as it did after Cata. Every expansion they will get back some, but I expect it won't be for long. 

     

    Best post so far.

     

    I think we should stop lumping all FTP into the same category since there are some truely terrible models within this system.  It all comes down to execution and not nickel and diming players to death with every little thing.

    The fact that MJ's game is set to release right around the time of his prediction is also laughable.

     

    The real reason FTP is here to stay is because the era of people playing 1 MMO for years and years is over.

    Most games make decent money the first year.  It's after that point that proves if a model works well or not.  I never heard much of anything about GW1's profitability a year after release or expansion.  I've yet to hear any company boasting of huge profits in a F2P game older than a year.  I hear lots of noise about account numbers and nothing about actual income.  I've noticed more and more F2P games closing after they've been going for more than a year.

    And yet, B2P games are pretty new when it comes to continued revenue. GW2 has not been out very long, but it is making ArenaNet/NCSoft alot of money every quarter. GW1 did not really have a cash shop, it had some micro-transactions after a few years of being out, but no cash-shop. So obviously it wasn't going to be a huge revenue type game. I mean, they didn't need it to be...it was made by 10 guys. I mean B2P clearly worked here since they had some rather large expansions at a pretty crazy frequency until development was ceased to work on GW2.

    Things have obviously changed since then and the company is now massive (and continues to hire). So they need the income, which they are making plenty of. So we have not really seen how well B2P will do over a long period of time. But just based on what we have seen so far there is no indication that it won't keep making them money.  But you can't lump B2P in with F2P because they have completely different payment models and gameplay models. 

    No one is going to make noise about account numbers for a F2P game. Thats one of the reasons games go F2P is to hide these numbers. Obviously they will talk about income, but not on a specific basis. It will be part of an earnings report that only the number crunching investors can understand. It does not mean they are not making money. This is like when people say "X game is dying" because they or their few friends don't play it. I am also wondering what F2P games are closing? Can you give me some examples? Are you talking about some obscure facebook game or something that was hardly advertised? 

  • Plastic-MetalPlastic-Metal Highland Heights, KYPosts: 405Member
    Originally posted by KappenWiz
    Luckily, it looks like this thread will still be going 3-5 years from now, so we'll be able to declare a winner.

    Yep, some people just need to stop feeding the trolls and people that aren't necessarily trolls, but eager to wage e-peen forum war over meaningless discussions.  On the bright side, each post increases CU's visibility.

    My name is Plastic-Metal and my name is an oxymoron.

    image

1789101113»
Sign In or Register to comment.