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!

That MMO die so fast is the result of F2P.

123457»

Comments

  • LoktofeitLoktofeit Stone Mountain, GAPosts: 13,649Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    For anyone who is still clueless how F2P work,  or people in denial.

    F2P get their money through the leveling process, people want to level faster than others, they want to make the grind fun, they need gear, XP, items. That's where whales and regular players spend the money. Those first few weeks / months, is where insane amounts of money are spent in the cash shop.

    After those first few weeks are over, it doesn't matter anymore. So the company needs a new game to do that same trick once more. And they make another MMO. F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO.

    The payment model directly influences the longevity of the game.

    Which is why PWI, Wizard 101, Shattered Galaxy, Flyff, Habbo Hotel, DOFUS, Maple Story, Club Penguin and Navy Field all closed down 6-8 years ago.

    My mistake. They're all still running.

    "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO."

    Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.

     

    Let's not toss around 'clueless' and 'in denial' so freely.

    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

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO."

    Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.

     

    All those companies use F2P now.

    Thanks for proving my point!

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by Loktofeit 

    Let's not toss around 'clueless' and 'in denial' so freely.

    irony

  • DerrosDerros Posts: 1,076Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO."

    Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.

     

    All those companies use F2P now.

    Thanks for proving my point!

    They use F2P because the sub models didnt work out for them. 

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Loktofeit "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO." Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.  
    All those companies use F2P now.

    Thanks for proving my point!




    You conveniently ignored the list of F2P MMOs that have been running for a very long time. At least a couple of them have millions of players.

    The problem with what you're saying is that developers could follow a short development cycle, releasing many games in a row expecting players to play for a short period of time and use B2P or P2P payment models. Whether intentional or not, this has been done. The payment model doesn't determine what kind of game a developer builds.

    You can prove any point you want if you ignore all of the information that disputes your point. For instance, you are attributing Blizzard's lack of additional MMOs to their payment model while ignoring their glacially slow development process and the fact that they have other games generating income for the company. Not to mention that WoW is the outlier-ingest outlier that ever outlier-ed.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • apsjinkapsjink TomtebyPosts: 11Member

    As far as I'm concerned the OP is spot on in his/her analysis. The price model of most F2P mmo:s today just don't appeal to me. They are heading more and more towards the awful P2W. I want to play and compete in a world on equal terms with everybody else I see around me.

    One model I think works although is a F2P/P2P combo in which you get to experience only a limited subset of the entire MMO if you play F2P. This could be limiting the zones/dungeons you have access to for example. But if you go decide to go P2P everything opens up to you and you are on equal terms with everyone.

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by Derros
    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Loktofeit

    "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO."

    Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.

     

    All those companies use F2P now.

    Thanks for proving my point!

    They use F2P because the sub models didnt work out for them. 

    SOE's games had been running for over a decade on P2P.

    They changed to F2P because it makes more money, that's why.

    Same with NCSoft.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by CalmOceans
    Originally posted by Derros Originally posted by CalmOceans Originally posted by Loktofeit "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO." Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.  
    All those companies use F2P now. Thanks for proving my point!
    They use F2P because the sub models didnt work out for them. 
    SOE's games had been running for over a decade on P2P.

    They changed to F2P because it makes more money, that's why.

    Same with NCSoft.




    Again with the ignoring freely available information.

    F2P can make more money. In several cases, it made more money than "not enough money to continue running a game".

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • KyleranKyleran Tampa, FLPosts: 19,988Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by DamonVile
    Originally posted by Kyleran
    Originally posted by Loktofeit
    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    The mere fact you need to pay an upfront cost by buying the game in P2P means people are more willing to build a community.

    Does paying an entry fee at a club/party/concert make you more willing to interact with others than if you had gotten in for free?

    That seems like a real leap of logic. Is this another "keep the riff-raff out" thing?

    Actually, sometimes it does.  Let's look at the analogy of a the golf country club.  If you play golf at a public course, no matter how often you will never build the same bonds with the other players as people who join a private country club.

    Of course, they are joining partly to keep out the "riff-raff", which of course doesn't actually work any better than it does in MMO's, but they definitely develop more social bonds based on their commonly shared "membership" than the public golf course player does.

    Is it the fee that generates this sense of belonging? No, it's part of being something special, a member, and I do believe people who pay a sub fee are more vested in playing a single MMORPG for longer periods of times than those who are more tourists to the game.

    That might be true if free games didn't have guilds, but most people looking for the social aspect of an mmo look for it in the same small groups of " exclusive" memberships guilds offer in both types of games.

    Free to play for sure has more people come and go but people quitting are a part of every mmo. You make friends with the people who stay regardless of the payment type.


    Great point, DamonVile.

    Kyleran, when paying for the exclusive country club over the free golf course, the 'special' is in the priority and extras that come with membership, not just in having paid the fee. Subscription MMOs don't offer such things over the F2P MMOs. If anything, such a situation only exists within the F2P MMOs that also offer subs or VIP options.

    I quite agree, and in fact, I favor subscription members having clearly discernible benefits over non subscribers, or even those who partake of the cash shop regularly. 

    Provide strong incentives to be a member and people will consider paying the toll, thereby generating a more predictable revenue stream over the longer haul.

     

    In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
    "I don't have one life, I have many lives" - Grunty
    Still currently "subscribed" to EVE, and only EVE!!!
    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Originally posted by Derros

    Originally posted by CalmOceans

    Originally posted by Loktofeit "F2P MMO companies often have 10 MMO or more. Blizzard has 1 MMO." Yes, the outlier has 1. SOE, Funcom, EA, Turbine, and NCSoft - the majority of the other companies that dominated subscription gaming for the past decade or so - all have more than one.  
    All those companies use F2P now. Thanks for proving my point!
    They use F2P because the sub models didnt work out for them. 
    SOE's games had been running for over a decade on P2P.

     

    They changed to F2P because it makes more money, that's why.

    Same with NCSoft.



    Again with the ignoring freely available information.

    F2P can make more money. In several cases, it made more money than "not enough money to continue running a game".

     

    in fact, F2P is making more money than P2P-only in the market.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,758Member Uncommon

    I do not think the advent of F2P has been the main factor in MMO's ending up as short cycle games. MMO designers took up the design principles of solo games long before we saw a plethora on F2P MMO's on the market. They also decided to shift to polished production for launch, rather than production for the long haul, that showed they were favouring box sales over subscriptions.

    I think the main contributing factor F2P MMOs have had in making MMO's short cycle games is there is so many of them. That choice has turned players into content locusts. We had lots of MMO's several years ago of course, but in the last few years the field has exploded.

    So why I am hard pressed to say something great about F2P, I won't lay this one at its door.

    F2P has almost become a gaming social services, allowing those who don't have or will not spend the cash to play games. This is why we have so many advocates of F2P on here. Without F2P they would not be gaming or gaming as much.

     

     

  • AmjocoAmjoco Layton, UTPosts: 4,778Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Grahor
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by colddog04

    I would call that a fantasy.

    Thats because you lack logical thinking and any ability to do your own research.  So you are going to go with NOPE YOUR WRONG YOUR FANTASY!  If you had spent time looking at the MMO publishers, the amount invested and the amount of revenue coming in you would see that it does not add up.  So keep flapping your gums.  

    Since it's you who've made the postulate, it's up to you to support it with research, data and links. Not up to him. So do it. Support what you've said.

     

    Ah, what am I talking about. A mmorpg.com poster understanding the basics of debating? Forget it. Not enough brain capacity and education.

    More personal attacks?

    Death is nothing to us, since when we are, Death has not come, and when death has come, we are not.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by Scot

    I do not think the advent of F2P has been the main factor in MMO's ending up as short cycle games. MMO designers took up the design principles of solo games long before we saw a plethora on F2P MMO's on the market. They also decided to shift to polished production for launch, rather than production for the long haul, that showed they were favouring box sales over subscriptions.

    I think the main contributing factor F2P MMOs have had in making MMO's short cycle games is there is so many of them. That choice has turned players into content locusts. We had lots of MMO's several years ago of course, but in the last few years the field has exploded.

    So why I am hard pressed to say something great about F2P, I won't lay this one at its door.

    F2P has almost become a gaming social services, allowing those who don't have or will not spend the cash to play games. This is why we have so many advocates of F2P on here. Without F2P they would not be gaming or gaming as much.

     

     

    You are right ... MMOs are designed for solo .. shorter life cycle before F2P. That, i think, is a response to the market. Humans are noted for "variety seeking" (there is plenty of literature on it). I doubt many would be happy playing only one game for a long time (aside from some MMO die-hard here). Hence, shorter cycle, more games in response to this need.

    More competition is also a factor. People like new things. If there are 10 new games coming onto the market every month, why do i want to be loyal to the old one? And the community argument does not matter because all i need to do is to have my existing friends to move with me (or even just some of them).

    Lastly, you are also right about motivation. I won't be gaming as much if there aren't as many F2p out there. It is a great time to enjoy free fun, practically served on a silver plat by teh devs. I will enjoy it while it last.

     

  • MindTriggerMindTrigger La Quinta, CAPosts: 2,596Member
    Originally posted by Consequence

    MMOs are dieing for a variety of reason but most of them stem from 1 fact than many people on these forums seem to get offended by:

     

    PCs are dieing.

     

    Tablets cannibalized 3.5% of the PC market from 2011 to 2012. That figure went up to 7.5% from 2012 - 2013. So in 2 years PC sales have dropped 11%

     

    People like to respond to this point by saying "Tons of people around the world still use PCs though!" While this is true it is looking at the problem from the wrong angle. Gamers always make the mistake of assuming that devs are the ones behind games and ignoring the other half of the equation....financing.

     

    Devs need money to develop games and  very few financiers want to give money to a dev who works in a shrinking industry.  This is likely why we have seen Blizzard's "titan" shelved. It is also why we see so many new "jump start" projects popping up all over. Devs have been incapable of getting money elsewhere so they go to the consumer. It is also why we see so many half baked MMO releases in recent years. The money guys behind the devs are demanding they release before the market is cannibalized even more, which in turn leads to incomplete projects hitting the markets and angering gamers.

     

    The problem is expected to get even worse going forward. Look at the new Xbox coming out. It has a processor capable of doing many of the things computers can do. Who knows if it will work out, but clearly Microsoft is trying to further cannibalize dying PC gaming market with a console they say is capable of PC like performance. I know PCs are always going to outpace consoles as far as top end gaming, but the fact is games are not made for top end machines, they are made for the masses.  Right now, the masses are leaving the PC behind.

    The PC gaming market as a whole has been growing.  PC hardware sales are down because of other choices, but this doesn't affect PC gamers.  It may be a niche market, but it's a huge one.  PC games aren't going anywhere, and they still represent the cutting edge of computer gaming in general.  There are plenty of articles talking about PC gaming growth the large size of the market.  Do a little research.  Google "PC gaming growth" for some articles.

    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.

  • ScotScot UKPosts: 5,758Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by MindTrigger
    Originally posted by Consequence

    MMOs are dieing for a variety of reason but most of them stem from 1 fact than many people on these forums seem to get offended by:

     

    PCs are dieing.

     

    Tablets cannibalized 3.5% of the PC market from 2011 to 2012. That figure went up to 7.5% from 2012 - 2013. So in 2 years PC sales have dropped 11%

     

    People like to respond to this point by saying "Tons of people around the world still use PCs though!" While this is true it is looking at the problem from the wrong angle. Gamers always make the mistake of assuming that devs are the ones behind games and ignoring the other half of the equation....financing.

     

    Devs need money to develop games and  very few financiers want to give money to a dev who works in a shrinking industry.  This is likely why we have seen Blizzard's "titan" shelved. It is also why we see so many new "jump start" projects popping up all over. Devs have been incapable of getting money elsewhere so they go to the consumer. It is also why we see so many half baked MMO releases in recent years. The money guys behind the devs are demanding they release before the market is cannibalized even more, which in turn leads to incomplete projects hitting the markets and angering gamers.

     

    The problem is expected to get even worse going forward. Look at the new Xbox coming out. It has a processor capable of doing many of the things computers can do. Who knows if it will work out, but clearly Microsoft is trying to further cannibalize dying PC gaming market with a console they say is capable of PC like performance. I know PCs are always going to outpace consoles as far as top end gaming, but the fact is games are not made for top end machines, they are made for the masses.  Right now, the masses are leaving the PC be

    The PC gaming market as a whole has been growing.  PC hardware sales are down because of other choices, but this doesn't affect PC gamers.  It may be a niche market, but it's a huge one.  PC games aren't going anywhere, and they still represent the cutting edge of computer gaming in general.  There are plenty of articles talking about PC gaming growth the large size of the market.  Do a little research.  Google "PC gaming growth" for some articles.

    Indeed, if you follow the doomsayers you would have been waiting for the PC to die since the late 90's. And when it comes to gaming costs are not console games more expensive? Also one of the best old selling points a console had in my eyes was no patches, the games they sold had to work. That's long gone now, consoles are in the same boat as PC's for dodgy releases that launched too early.

    Laptops and tablets are PC's too and these new ones like HP Envy have both the functionality of a laptop with the ease of use of a tablet. PC's are not going anywhere.

    The real danger for both PC's and consoles is smartphones. I don't seem them replacing the others as the new gaming machine but the linking of every PC/Console game to a smartphone app has started. Smartphones have small screens, this will lead to small screen versions of games, gaming is best when its big and brash, smartphones are leading us away from that. Once games make a huge splash on a new platform like they did on consoles the coding starts to favour that platform. I wonder if game designers are already thinking, "Could we downsize this and put it on a smartphone?" That would lead to design decisions that favour smartphones and not PC's or consoles.

     

  • GroovyFlowerGroovyFlower RdamPosts: 1,245Member
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    Have you noticed how there are hundreds of MMO but they all die off in a matter of months.

    Have you noticed that people jump from MMO to MMO.

    Have you noticed how communities in MMO are dead, no one really gives a damn anymore.

    Have you noticed how you seem to level to the cap in a matter of weeks.

     

    In a F2P MMO all the freeloaders bail the ship once they hit the paywall after a few weeks, the ones who get tired of having to pay to progress bail the ship a few weeks after, and the whales is all that's left, but they jump ship too once they realise they're competing against themselves and no longer have a monetary edge over freeloaders.

    As a result, no one joins older F2P, since they would need to spend hundreds of dollars to compete with the whales. The MMO simply die.

    As a result the quality of the MMO goes down too, since the companies make dying MMO after dying MMO, to rake in cash from the whales.

    In China MMo last a couple of months, and they shut them down. This is the future of F2P MMO, completely meaningless casino adventures. Congorats.

    Don't matter much korea is spewing out almost every week(day?) a new mmo, soon we have thousends of mmo's all with big eyes big weapons anime style which i hate btw:P

  • CalmOceansCalmOceans BergenPosts: 2,273Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon

    MMOs are designed for solo

    You need to stop with your passive-aggressive instigation, it's getting really old.

  • GrahorGrahor aaaPosts: 828Member
    Originally posted by Amjoco
    Originally posted by Grahor
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by colddog04

    I would call that a fantasy.

    Thats because you lack logical thinking and any ability to do your own research.  So you are going to go with NOPE YOUR WRONG YOUR FANTASY!  If you had spent time looking at the MMO publishers, the amount invested and the amount of revenue coming in you would see that it does not add up.  So keep flapping your gums.  

    Since it's you who've made the postulate, it's up to you to support it with research, data and links. Not up to him. So do it. Support what you've said.

     

    Ah, what am I talking about. A mmorpg.com poster understanding the basics of debating? Forget it. Not enough brain capacity and education.

    More personal attacks?

    You are saying as if it's a bad thing.

     

    But no, not in this case. I'm not commenting on any particular user. I'm commenting on general level of intelligence and education of site's users. So definitely not personal.

     

    Certainly no more personal than "F2P players are freeloaders! Who don't understand that F2P is not free! 'Cause they are stooopid!"

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    Have you noticed how there are hundreds of MMO but they all die off in a matter of months.

    Have you noticed that people jump from MMO to MMO.

    Have you noticed how communities in MMO are dead, no one really gives a damn anymore.

    Have you noticed how you seem to level to the cap in a matter of weeks.

     

    In a F2P MMO all the freeloaders bail the ship once they hit the paywall after a few weeks, the ones who get tired of having to pay to progress bail the ship a few weeks after, and the whales is all that's left, but they jump ship too once they realise they're competing against themselves and no longer have a monetary edge over freeloaders.

    As a result, no one joins older F2P, since they would need to spend hundreds of dollars to compete with the whales. The MMO simply die.

    As a result the quality of the MMO goes down too, since the companies make dying MMO after dying MMO, to rake in cash from the whales.

    In China MMo last a couple of months, and they shut them down. This is the future of F2P MMO, completely meaningless casino adventures. Congorats.

    Sad but true.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • DoogiehowserDoogiehowser ParisPosts: 1,873Member
    Originally posted by Waterlily

    Have you noticed how there are hundreds of MMO but they all die off in a matter of months.

    Have you noticed that people jump from MMO to MMO.

    Have you noticed how communities in MMO are dead, no one really gives a damn anymore.

    Have you noticed how you seem to level to the cap in a matter of weeks.

     

    In a F2P MMO all the freeloaders bail the ship once they hit the paywall after a few weeks, the ones who get tired of having to pay to progress bail the ship a few weeks after, and the whales is all that's left, but they jump ship too once they realise they're competing against themselves and no longer have a monetary edge over freeloaders.

    As a result, no one joins older F2P, since they would need to spend hundreds of dollars to compete with the whales. The MMO simply die.

    As a result the quality of the MMO goes down too, since the companies make dying MMO after dying MMO, to rake in cash from the whales.

    In China MMo last a couple of months, and they shut them down. This is the future of F2P MMO, completely meaningless casino adventures. Congorats.

    As usual trying to pass personal opinion as some kind of fact.

    What Chinese F2P MMO lats only a month? what has that got anything to do with with western F2P MMOS? what F2P MMOS in west are dead or dying?

    Let us start with some real information for a change.

    "The problem is that the hardcore folks always want the same thing: 'We want exactly what you gave us before, but it has to be completely different.'
    -Jesse Schell

    "Online gamers are the most ludicrously entitled beings since Caligula made his horse a senator, and at least the horse never said anything stupid."
    -Luke McKinney

    image

  • AyulinAyulin Mt marion, NYPosts: 334Member
    Originally posted by colddog04

    If anything, MMOs die so fast because they release with a P2P model. The most recent examples are SWTOR and TSW which lost record numbers of people faster than any MMOs before them. F2P and B2P respectively helped to save those games from failure. Even WoW, the beast that never dies, is dropping subs at a record rate.

    This myth needs to go away already, because it's absolutely 100% false. When the wheels fall off a poorly-made carriage, you don't blame the horse.

    Go back and do some research on the two games you mentioned, and you'll find the reason those games changed their revenue models. Neither had anything to do with the revenue model. It had to do with people not finding the games worth a monthly sub for a variety of gameplay-related issues.

    MMOs that have, and do, continue to provide an adequate experience to enough people to maintain a subscription fee, remain as sub-based MMOs.

    Hell, even P2P MMOs that have converted to F2P/Cash Shops have retained a subscription option, because it's still a popular and quite viable (not to mention reliable and predictable) revenue model.

    I don't know where you get the idea that P2P games aren't dying fast. Sub-only payment models are the reason that these games died so fast and F2P/B2P models are the reason they were revitalized.

    Maybe it's the fact that there are MMOs that have been around over 10 years now that have remained subscription based the entire time, continue to remain subscription-based, and are doing just fine?

    Maybe it's the fact that there are MMOs coming out in the future that will also be subscription based and will remain subscription based so long as they are well enough designed to maintain a healthy enough population?

    Maybe it's because the MMOs that have gone F2P after launching as P2P in recent years were not designed well-enough as P2P MMOs to survive as one?

    MMOs of ~10 years ago were designed as massive worlds to be "lived in" for months, or even years, keeping players involved, keeping players interacting with each other in a variety of ways, building and supporting communities within them.

    MMOs of the past 4-6 years have been designed as short-term "burn through the content and move on" affairs, designed primarily around solo gameplay, with very little, if any, focus on community building. They can be "finished" and shelved inside of a month. Why would anyone stick around to pay a subscription if they've managed to see and do everything they'd want to before their free 30 days runs out?

    The Sub-based MMOs that fail, do so because their designers have failed to design them to last as one. The MMOs that end up going F2P were not designed well enough to be P2P.

    To reiterate: Sub-based MMOs do not fail due to their revenue model. They fail due to their design.

  • danwest58danwest58 Cincinnati, OHPosts: 981Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Ayulin
    Originally posted by colddog04

    If anything, MMOs die so fast because they release with a P2P model. The most recent examples are SWTOR and TSW which lost record numbers of people faster than any MMOs before them. F2P and B2P respectively helped to save those games from failure. Even WoW, the beast that never dies, is dropping subs at a record rate.

    This myth needs to go away already, because it's absolutely 100% false. When the wheels fall off a poorly-made carriage, you don't blame the horse.

    Go back and do some research on the two games you mentioned, and you'll find the reason those games changed their revenue models. Neither had anything to do with the revenue model. It had to do with people not finding the games worth a monthly sub for a variety of gameplay-related issues.

    MMOs that have, and do, continue to provide an adequate experience to enough people to maintain a subscription fee, remain as sub-based MMOs.

    Hell, even P2P MMOs that have converted to F2P/Cash Shops have retained a subscription option, because it's still a popular and quite viable (not to mention reliable and predictable) revenue model.

    I don't know where you get the idea that P2P games aren't dying fast. Sub-only payment models are the reason that these games died so fast and F2P/B2P models are the reason they were revitalized.

    Maybe it's the fact that there are MMOs that have been around over 10 years now that have remained subscription based the entire time, continue to remain subscription-based, and are doing just fine?

    Maybe it's the fact that there are MMOs coming out in the future that will also be subscription based and will remain subscription based so long as they are well enough designed to maintain a healthy enough population?

    Maybe it's because the MMOs that have gone F2P after launching as P2P in recent years were not designed well-enough as P2P MMOs to survive as one?

    MMOs of ~10 years ago were designed as massive worlds to be "lived in" for months, or even years, keeping players involved, keeping players interacting with each other in a variety of ways, building and supporting communities within them.

    MMOs of the past 4-6 years have been designed as short-term "burn through the content and move on" affairs, designed primarily around solo gameplay, with very little, if any, focus on community building. They can be "finished" and shelved inside of a month. Why would anyone stick around to pay a subscription if they've managed to see and do everything they'd want to before their free 30 days runs out?

    The Sub-based MMOs that fail, do so because their designers have failed to design them to last as one.

    To reiterate: Sub-based MMOs do not fail due to their revenue model. They fail due to their design.

    There is 1 other factor that Yoshi-P from FFXIV stated about F2P games.  Most P2P games that go F2P have investors that want their money back as soon as the game drops.  When a game does not do well and it looks like the game will not pay back investors on Subs alone in a timely manner the game goes F2P with a cash shop to try to get more money for the investors faster.  Games like FFXIV who do not have investors do not plan to go F2P because if it takes them 2 years to make a profit they are find with that and they design the game around that.  They do not design a game around making as much money as fast as possible to make investors money.

    image

123457»
Sign In or Register to comment.