Not that I would play it but it would do well to go F2P. My friend plays and its a ghosttown. Cant get him to leave his raiding guild that never raids due to absenses. He is weird like that.
If they did 1-50 would be free with a 15% xp penalty with 10000 gold limitation and no limit on 1-50 equipment. $5 for expansion and to remove gold limitation and 50+ armor limitation. Not really.
Originally posted by Eir_S Originally posted by syntax42Asking for a game to go F2P is like asking for people to give you money on the street. Is $15 really that hard to scrounge up every month? You could go to the movies and spend more than that.
Getting really tired of seeing this argument. Yeah movies cost a certain amount, but you don't own the theatre. Paying a sub is continuing to pay a mandatory price for something you already own.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
And seeing responses like this arnt much better when you are renting a service
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Originally posted by syntax42Asking for a game to go F2P is like asking for people to give you money on the street. Is $15 really that hard to scrounge up every month? You could go to the movies and spend more than that.
Getting really tired of seeing this argument. Yeah movies cost a certain amount, but you don't own the theatre. Paying a sub is continuing to pay a mandatory price for something you already own.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
And seeing responses like this arnt much better when you are renting a service
Yeah ok. Well until they decide which they want to sell to me, a product or a service, I'm not buying them both. Funny how I'm not paying extra for Guild Wars 2.
Your post doesn't magically make the movie analogy make sense.
Asking for a game to go F2P is like asking for people to give you money on the street. Is $15 really that hard to scrounge up every month? You could go to the movies and spend more than that.
Getting really tired of seeing this argument. Yeah movies cost a certain amount, but you don't own the theatre. Paying a sub is continuing to pay a mandatory price for something you already own.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
Its not an analogy, its just a simple illustration that 15 bucks a month is relatively cheap entertainment.
As for the idea behind it, people seem to forget that ideally an MMORPG never stops development, its not like most games where there are no ongoing costs. Bandwidth may be relatively cheap but devloper salaries are not. WoW is the exception, which takes in far more money than it needs. If rift was doing that well revenue wise they wouldnt have laid off 1/3rd of their staff.
If you want to argue a game like DAOC should be 5 bucks a month since there is no development for it, thats fine. But for games with sub 200k subs and still a decent sized team such as Rift the sub price is absolutely fair.
I think it's pretty clear that Trion has prepared to go F2P, they are just stretching it out and trying to milk as much as possible beforehand. Their wardrobe system is pretty nifty, but their selection of costumes is low. They implemented the Deep's Depot, which right now features very little. They seem on the verge of going F2P and they know people will come because as we can see, many posters here have admited they would play if it didn't cost anything.
They probably want to increase the time between F2P and the SL expansion. Or they are waiting for the populations to drop to a certain threshold. 1-50 zones may be empty, but if you want to find a group you usually can. Most people are also concetrating on 50-60 because the game does not level as fast as other games at this stage. Additionally, they may be concetrating a lot of their resources on Defiance, so once they have some attention to spare for Rift it's probably going to happen pretty soon.
Originally posted by syntax42Asking for a game to go F2P is like asking for people to give you money on the street. Is $15 really that hard to scrounge up every month? You could go to the movies and spend more than that.
Getting really tired of seeing this argument. Yeah movies cost a certain amount, but you don't own the theatre. Paying a sub is continuing to pay a mandatory price for something you already own.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
And seeing responses like this arnt much better when you are renting a service
Yeah ok. Well until they decide which they want to sell to me, a product or a service, I'm not buying them both. Funny how I'm not paying extra for Guild Wars 2.
Your post doesn't magically make the movie analogy make sense.
So i guess you are against things such as sattelite TV that do the same thing?
And Guild Wars 2 has massive numbers, a luxury other games dont have. Rift didnt make up its initial development cost in box sales. We still dont know yet if B2P is sustaionable going forward without a heavier cash shop, the game has been out less than a year so far.
Originally posted by syntax42Asking for a game to go F2P is like asking for people to give you money on the street. Is $15 really that hard to scrounge up every month? You could go to the movies and spend more than that.
Getting really tired of seeing this argument. Yeah movies cost a certain amount, but you don't own the theatre. Paying a sub is continuing to pay a mandatory price for something you already own.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
And seeing responses like this arnt much better when you are renting a service
Yeah ok. Well until they decide which they want to sell to me, a product or a service, I'm not buying them both. Funny how I'm not paying extra for Guild Wars 2.
Your post doesn't magically make the movie analogy make sense.
So i guess you are against things such as sattelite TV that do the same thing?
And Guild Wars 2 has massive numbers, a luxury other games dont have. Rift didnt make up its initial development cost in box sales. We still dont know yet if B2P is sustaionable going forward without a heavier cash shop, the game has been out less than a year so far.
That's a fair point, but I'm wondering if GW2 hadn't raked in the numbers it did, how they'd have been affected. They obviously believed in the no sub model, before they ever sold a single copy. Do you suppose they'd have gone subscription if it didn't pan out the way most companies go F2P? I'm not seeing it, but it's interesting to consider.
And I think it's unlikely that Trion wouldn't go F2P if they saw the potential benefit. Many games have gotten the burst of funds they needed from switching to this model.
Is it just me or does the only thing that buying the SL expansion get you in the f2p version the two additional soul lines? Am I reading their faq wrong about that? They said they have been working on the f2p conversion since before SL and wanted to get SL out first. If that is really the case and the only benefits that someone gets having bought SL are the two soul lines then that is kind of messed up. Maybe I missread the producers letter that, to me, implied they had the change planned out before SL launched which would mean they launched a 40$ expansion knowing it would be going f2p and then the only benefits for those that bought it are 2 souls (character classes). Everyone will get access to all of the content from my understanding. Again, I could be incorrect on one or more of these points and just misunderstood.
Originally posted by Purutzil Honestly? I'd say Trion is content with how Rift is going right now. It has to be making a good enough profit that subscription is working for them, and for me it was well worth a sub price to play.
"Honestly? I'd say Trion is content with how Rift is going right now"
didn't take all that long for it to be proven how horribly wrong you were. lol.
Comments
SUP
If they did 1-50 would be free with a 15% xp penalty with 10000 gold limitation and no limit on 1-50 equipment. $5 for expansion and to remove gold limitation and 50+ armor limitation. Not really.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
no way
they should not go f2p
I am not subscribed currently but I activate it 25% of the year....and I dun see ghost towns.
Stop with that terrible analogy, please. It's not the price that bothers most people, it's the idea behind it.
And seeing responses like this arnt much better when you are renting a service
TSW - AoC - Aion - WOW - EVE - Fallen Earth - Co - Rift - || XNA C# Java Development
Yeah ok. Well until they decide which they want to sell to me, a product or a service, I'm not buying them both. Funny how I'm not paying extra for Guild Wars 2.
Your post doesn't magically make the movie analogy make sense.
Its not an analogy, its just a simple illustration that 15 bucks a month is relatively cheap entertainment.
As for the idea behind it, people seem to forget that ideally an MMORPG never stops development, its not like most games where there are no ongoing costs. Bandwidth may be relatively cheap but devloper salaries are not. WoW is the exception, which takes in far more money than it needs. If rift was doing that well revenue wise they wouldnt have laid off 1/3rd of their staff.
If you want to argue a game like DAOC should be 5 bucks a month since there is no development for it, thats fine. But for games with sub 200k subs and still a decent sized team such as Rift the sub price is absolutely fair.
I think it's pretty clear that Trion has prepared to go F2P, they are just stretching it out and trying to milk as much as possible beforehand. Their wardrobe system is pretty nifty, but their selection of costumes is low. They implemented the Deep's Depot, which right now features very little. They seem on the verge of going F2P and they know people will come because as we can see, many posters here have admited they would play if it didn't cost anything.
They probably want to increase the time between F2P and the SL expansion. Or they are waiting for the populations to drop to a certain threshold. 1-50 zones may be empty, but if you want to find a group you usually can. Most people are also concetrating on 50-60 because the game does not level as fast as other games at this stage. Additionally, they may be concetrating a lot of their resources on Defiance, so once they have some attention to spare for Rift it's probably going to happen pretty soon.
Played: UO, DAoC, Shadowbane, DDO, LOTRO, Aion, Rift, TERA
Sampled: WoW, AoC, GW2, Vanguard, FF XIV, Neverwinter
Playing: ESO
So i guess you are against things such as sattelite TV that do the same thing?
And Guild Wars 2 has massive numbers, a luxury other games dont have. Rift didnt make up its initial development cost in box sales. We still dont know yet if B2P is sustaionable going forward without a heavier cash shop, the game has been out less than a year so far.
That's a fair point, but I'm wondering if GW2 hadn't raked in the numbers it did, how they'd have been affected. They obviously believed in the no sub model, before they ever sold a single copy. Do you suppose they'd have gone subscription if it didn't pan out the way most companies go F2P? I'm not seeing it, but it's interesting to consider.
And I think it's unlikely that Trion wouldn't go F2P if they saw the potential benefit. Many games have gotten the burst of funds they needed from switching to this model.
Are you talking about Rift? Wolfsbane, Deepwood, Faeblight are all busy.
Rift
"Negaholics are people who become addicted to negativity and self-doubt, they find fault in most things and never seem to be satisfied."
^MMORPG.com
"Honestly? I'd say Trion is content with how Rift is going right now"
didn't take all that long for it to be proven how horribly wrong you were. lol.