It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Originally posted by Doogiehowser EVE isn't a pure P2P MMO. Majority of people use PLEX to buy sub. That is why they don't need to go F2P.
you make it sound like players can buy a sub with in game credits from ccp but that's not really what's going on is it ? Someone has to buy that plex with real money and they sell it to you for credits. So in a sense someone is paying real money for your sub, CCP is still getting their real cash, just not from you. ( I don't play eve so correct me if I have that wrong )
So it is still p2p, they just let someone else pay for it.
Originally posted by Wicoa Aren't lineage 1 and 2 sub games too? Dark age of camelot is still sub So is warhammer Plenty of them. There was a good point made though. If you have a subscriber base then they expect regular large updates. F2P games get away with minor maintenance and fanfare very tiny tiny updates.
OP is talking about now.
Even UO is still P2P isn"t it? but it doesn't say much about recent times because P2P model even though viable udring days of EQ and DAOC isn't that profitable anymore. Too much has changed since days of Lineage. And reason WAR isn't going F2P is because EA has already made its money back on the game so they are either ignoring it or just simply don't see it as potential MMO to bring them any serious profit by going F2P.
"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
Originally posted by Lobotomist Said that. I dont think F2P is here to stay either. I think market is moving towards B2P as model that makes more logic both for player and publisher.
I wouldn't rule it out, but I doubt B2P is the destination either.
F2P, B2P and P2P each have their strengths, and in a way aren't mutually exclusive. Granted I see multi-client "games" as a very likely future, with EVE/Dust as a shaky first step. IMO a F2P timed resource yield game (farmville) attached to a "real" market would do well. That market would reside in a B2P game that offered tiered packages for VAS. All 3 models used in one world.
Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Doogiehowser EVE isn't a pure P2P MMO. Majority of people use PLEX to buy sub. That is why they don't need to go F2P.
I was simply stating that EVE gives option to players. An alternate method to subscribe without using your credit or debit card.
But as far as someone else paying for it..... isn't that how all these F2P/P2P MMO works? someone is always paying for your content if you don't spend your money. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people are not using that 'free' option or method of PLEX to subscribe in case of EVE.
Originally posted by Fendel84M Originally posted by Robokapp wow isn't. eve isn't. it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.
So in your opinion, WoW and Eve are the only two good P2P MMOs ever made? And since you hate all F2P MMOs... is it your opinion that WoW and Eve are the only two good MMOs ever made, period?
I'll let the second row of my signature answer that for you.
"My Fantasy is having two men at once...
One Cooking and One Cleaning!"
"A good man can make you feel sexy,
strong and able to take on the whole world...
oh sorry...that's wine...wine does that..."
Originally posted by Doogiehowser But as far as someone else paying for it..... isn't that how all these F2P/P2P MMO works? someone is always paying for your content if you don't spend your money. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people are not using that 'free' option or method of PLEX to subscribe in case of EVE.
No not really. In a free to play if you don't pay you can still play. Plex just gives you an alternative to the sub. You have to do one or the other. There's still no "free ride " in eve. If anything plex lets you sell your time, it's more of a counter to gold selling than a play for free option. You still have to work for it to play.
Op you answered your own question.They go f2p because nobody would play their game if subbed,or numbers would be so low they wouldn't make any money.
What scares me about this industry is that games are dying out really fast now and a saturated market does not help.However the problem is that devs know these games are not lasting,so they will design them accordingly,meaning shallow games with no longevity built into them.Designing a cheaper game can support a f2p weather it starts that way or ends up that way,so my point is devs are going to be making a lot more f2p quality games than higher quality sub based games.
Also everyone knows a low population game is as good as done,going free to play allows games a chance of having a decent population so that the spenders will stick around.When population dies right out even the spenders leave,which is sort of what happened to AOC,it was a good game but everyone filed out in a follow the leader style.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Free art is still art. MMORPGs are essentially giant art galleries, you still have to pay to see the rarest paintings, but the seemingly more appealing "free" prints, are still just as enticing to most people. It all depends on how much you are willing to spend to keep the ones you like best.
The value of a pay2play model is only as great as the demand for it. Personally, I always have and probably always will play free2play games far more often than anything I have to pay extra for. Then again my first RPG was Mario.
it is tricky, peoples love word ,,Free,, but in real nothing is free.
only EVE is real MMO...but I am impressive with TSW
Originally posted by DamonVile Originally posted by Doogiehowser But as far as someone else paying for it..... isn't that how all these F2P/P2P MMO works? someone is always paying for your content if you don't spend your money. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people are not using that 'free' option or method of PLEX to subscribe in case of EVE.
And that is exactly what i said. However i don't see much difference between the two. In both cases someone else is using their real money to pay for you.
Originally posted by Fendel84M I'm not against P2P and I'm not against F2P I like all models(to some extent). But I hear it tossed around a lot, that P2P games make more money and get more updates and are hence better. If this is true, why are almost all the P2P games going F2P? Do they just hate money? Even Rift, which was every P2P die hard's anthem. "Look at Rift! That game pumps out so much content because it is P2P!" well...they went F2P. Were they tired of making all that money? Other than WoW, Eve is one of the only hold outs with a sub. But even that game allows players to basically buy in game currency through the plex system. (buy tons of plex and sell it all in game) so it's not a pure P2P game with everyone equal regardless of money spent. I am just curious what the reasoning here is. The P2P games are better, because they make more money, yet they all have to go F2P. Something feels off...
Part in red Guildwars 2 probaly gets the most updates out of every game out there atm monthly large patches with new content and dunguens that are just for the event going on.
Pre WoW gaming back when only little white kids with big glasses played and communities were much more closer and anything over 100k playerbase was considered a success.
1999 - 2000 UO (didn't like being skill capped but liked skilling back then) 2000-2004 Dransik then later Dransik Classic Throw in Runescape Classic too for 4 or 5 years. Was playing Runescape and Dransik at the same time at some point. No need to count The Realm, threshold-rpg.org, Drakkar or M59 or anything pre 1999 since internet was pay by the hour but still count as being subbed I guess. Probably played EQ in there somewhere too.
I've always played more than 1 MMO at the same time. All these games gone f2p now UO private, Dransik changed company use a token system to buy VIP, Runescape uses squeels, M59 runs off donation etc. So, the point is instead of getting only a sub a month people might spend more if they want more and can possibly get 6 months or a years worth of a sub out of a person in a shorter amount of time.
So, either because it sucks or because they want more money.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
Originally posted by Robokapp Originally posted by Fendel84M Originally posted by Robokapp wow isn't. eve isn't. it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.
no, in my opinion wow and eve are some good mmo's. you asked why all are going f2p, i gave you two examples that aren't.
I don't hate f2p mmo's, just the cash shops. I play a f2p mmo in my eve browser while mining. I think they're great temporary distractions, much like addictinggames.com games are - which are also f2p but without the cash shop. yet not MMOs.
so in your opinion, are all p2p mmo's going f2p like your title says ?
Funny, you mentioned WoW and Eve, this 2 mmo have not become an entertainment source of gaming anymore, it have became a lifestyle. The only reason why they are still p2p cause, obv the amount of subsribers *duh*, till they start losing lots of revenue, they'll bill your bank account/credit card monthly, to use it for their own leisure. The only p2p that was actually good and was not overwhelmed by simplicity was SWG, and UO and is dead/dying, although there's an emu for SWG. I do not hate P2P, in fact I'm looking forward for Repopulation.
Originally posted by Arthasm Cause they sux so bad?
Cause a simple mind cannot comprehend to play the game, hence they turn f2p to go for a population boom, whilst some p2p are still alive because they are too easy to play.
I think it more has to do with how nowadays there are a shit ton of options for MMOs and they are all competing with each other. Granted there is the quality issue of justification for an MMO to be P2P which is very hard nowadays as too much MMOs are held up to WoW standards.
I also think that companies always plan to go F2P and knew that that will be the buisness model, however they know full well that MMO gamers are impulsive buyers and they can make a shit ton of money with a retail+sub at launch and then convert to F2P later down the road if the game has the hype to back it.
I highly doubt that the P2P model is an outdated model and if a game justifies a P2P model, people will gladly pay it. Especially with some of these utter crap models like SWTOR and Neverwinter's F2P models.
Of course you have to take into account that the normal mob mentality is that people want everything free. Like last night at an Italian restaurant the owner was talking about how people will eat almost their entire meal who made the conscious choice to eat outside and then complain that there is a fly in the food. And when the owner offers another plate, the customer declines but they "lost their appetite" and wants the meal free.
Originally posted by Aelious Originally posted by Lobotomist Several reasons: 1. P2P model is outdated. - You can not charge subscription for a similar game that competitors give for free(ish). This is simple rule of market. 2. Subscription makes more money if you have enough subscribers. - Simply there is profit line where P2P game makes less money than F2P --- Said that. I dont think F2P is here to stay either. I think market is moving towards B2P as model that makes more logic both for player and publisher.
Great point. Up front cost to keep the company stable past the "drop" so it can transition into some form of cash shop. B2P also falls in line with the typical model for consoles, which look to be featuring a lot of MMOs soon.
I'd go along with this if B2P was truly that.... buy once, pay nothing more ever going forward (except the next expansion)
But by adding cash shop you make it worse than a F2P game, which can be really free (see Aion) with an optional cash shop which is superior model IMO.
The current B2P model just found a way to add big up front costs to a F2P model, and I don't see that as being advantageous, at least to the consumer.
"Winning" at EVE Online since May, 2007!
In my day MMORPG's were so hard we fought our way through dungeons in the snow, uphill both ways.
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™ "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
P2P games make more money, as long as a certain prerequirement is met:
1. The game must have enough subscribers to bring more revenue than the F2P model to offset the increased dev costs.
If the above condition is not met, the game is better off going F2P.
Well monetized F2P games make a lot more money than P2P games, because F2P games don't put a ceiling on how much some players can spend.
Example a player who wants to spend $5000 in F2P game, can't spend any more than $15 in P2P game.
F2P games allow whales (players that spend often 100x more than the rest) to spend as much as they want.
You'd be surprised how much the top 5% of players spend, usually enough to carry most of the free player base who never spend anything, and I mean they spend so much that it averages a LOT higher than $15er month per player.
Originally posted by Robokapp wow isn't. eve isn't. it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.
lol. That's kind of a myopic view. I don't think Rift is a bad game, even if I don't play it. And I thought EVE sucked. Maybe I'm just a "bad" player? Statements like yours don't work.
Originally posted by Eir_S Originally posted by Robokapp wow isn't. eve isn't. it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.
Talk about myopic!!
Your whole comment is all about you!
EVE, WoW and DAOC are all great games, even after all these years they are still strong and still have a sub. So obviously you are not the voice of MMO gamers, nor do you represent the current trend.
The very existence of the games I just mentioned proves it.
Having no knowledge other than my opinion this is what I think the reason is.
1 - Companies want to hedge their bets. If they go with a subscription they are banking on people loving their game and willing to pay a monthly fee on top of the box cost for it. If your game is average or worse, chances are it today's MMO market, you won't get alot of subscriptions. Not to mention the pressure of creating new content regularly for your subs.
2 - F2P game has less pressure on on it because it can be a success with fewer people. You don't need anything close to the WoW sub numbers to turn a profit, and being F2P you don't have the same pressure to keep generating content to keep monthly subscriptions. I would imagine the idea is to get people hooked for a few months, get them to pay for a few things (or in the case of real dedicated players buy everything), make some money of each one and then be happy when they move on to another game and stop taking up space on your server.
To me, the best method is to have a F2P game with a subscription option. Meaning players can sub to the game if they really like it and not ever need to bother with the F2P stuff or cash shops. But for those who aren't willing to Sub there is still the FTP option and cash shops for them.
My take on it is that in the old days, you'd buy the box and get 1 month free (no sub). Then, you'd be paying a sub for quite some time as you enjoyed the world the MMORPG presented.
Today's MMOs could charge a sub. Most players would be done with the game by the end of the 30 day free period after buying the box. Very few subs would be coming after that.
Instead of remedying this by making worlds for players to visit, they instead start from the ground up by making cash shop items to sustain them and staying with the shallow MMOs put out today.
I do not know what the corollary is, whether it is fewer players in the genre way back when making the sub more profitable, fewer MMOs on the market than today helping to keep players playing and paying, or massively more players now playing massively more games making the F2P model a better bet.
tl/dr: Games today are not worth a subscription fee to play.
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
"But I hear it tossed around a lot, that P2P games make more money...."
Not sure where you are hearing that. I'm not real sure I've heard anyone say that. Ever.
But, apparently, a false presumption makes for a good discussion.
I want a mmorpg where people have gone through misery, have gone through school stuff and actually have had sex even. -sagil
P2P is more profitable when demand for the product is above certain level.
Once the demand drops below this level, F2P becomes more profitable.
Finance director of the company behind the product meets with other directors at the board of directors meeting or meeting of one of its committees where they present a financial (profitability) analysis. In this analysis, they work with estimates and results of research made by marketing department, etc.
Based on the results of the analysis, the BoD makes a final decision regarding business model of their product.
WoW stays P2P because the demand is still quite strong (allegedly 8m+ subs) and still high above the point where F2P becomes more profitable. They may consider going F2P once the demand decreased below the level I mentioned above.
New AAA games usually start as P2P in order to find out the real level of demand for the product with this business model. Then based on the demand level, they either stick to it or if the demand is below the level at which there is the break point in profitability between F2P and P2P, they switch to F2P.
The cost of sales shouldnt be significantly affected by the business model, so it is mainly about revenues the business model can generate which is directly linked to demand level at certain price.
It is basic microeconomic principle.
TLDR: P2P is more profitable than F2P when the demand for the product exceeds certain point.