Originally posted by narmito final fantsy xi 10 years mmo still with subscription ... the end
Different market, different time. This is like saying we should go back to selling music only by selling whole albums. MP3 players changed the music market and using places like Itunes to sell singles makes way more money. They still sell albums and its worth it to keep making them but when a market changes you change or die. People are sick of paying for bad MMOs and know they need to play more then 10-20 level to learn what the game is about. F2P with a P2P option when you get end game is getting a lot of people to sub to games they would not have otherwise played. F2P is not bad its a good thing and FF14 may not know it yet. Some fans may not but this is going to be standard on all MMOs and you get with the program or fail. Box sales + sub for about the first year to grab all your fans and stabilize your game and then F2P a year later to bring in new players and grow the player base as much as you can.
Balony the game is still running and therefore is in the same market. Your right that many games are going f2p it is the new trend, that doesn't mean there is no market for p2p games.
Now do p2p games need to evolve some? Sure but that doesn't mean they have to go freemium. They just need to offer limited trials etc.
Exactly! And by the same exact company no less. That excuse of if "they made their money back a long time ago" is irrelevant too. So did EQ and they went F2P a long time ago. Im sure many of the other converted hybrid MMOs made their money as well from box sales or soon after, yet still changed. Not to mention how if SE thought F2P would yield bigger profits for them, they wouldve converted regardless.
Yet they didnt. Be it stubbornness, fan loyalty, some financial structure that makes P2P better for them , or just plain magic ... SE has shown theyre not F2P friendly.
There is a reason why games convert to F2P later and not at launch. The fans of the game are going to buy the box and pay 15 bucks a month. Thats a lot of money SE would never have seen if they went F2P from launch. Also when a MMO launches you dont want to many players to start as you are working on class balance and server quality of service. 6-12 months later you got the game running smoothly. Nows the time to switch to F2P and bring in your 2nd wave of players. Now you reward the fans who have been paying for the game with some tokens. F2P players enjoy the game to max level and the restriction on F2P gets them to sub if they like the game. Everyone wins.
There is a reason why games convert to F2P later and not at launch. The fans of the game are going to buy the box and pay 15 bucks a month. Thats a lot of money SE would never have seen if they went F2P from launch. Also when a MMO launches you dont want to many players to start as you are working on class balance and server quality of service. 6-12 months later you got the game running smoothly. Nows the time to switch to F2P and bring in your 2nd wave of players. Now you reward the fans who have been paying for the game with some tokens. F2P players enjoy the game to max level and the restriction on F2P gets them to sub if they like the game. Everyone wins.
Oh good grief lol!
Seriously... where do you people get this nonsense from?
They launch P2P because it's their preferred revenue model. For crying out loud, there's an article linked right in my signature where Yoshi-P explains, in his own (albeit translated) words, why he chose Subs for ARR, and why such a model is preferable to cash shops.
Yet you're here putting words in his mouth, carrying on like you have a single clue what you're talking about.
They don't want too many people at launch? Are you kidding? Having "too many people at launch" is a problem a MMO developer would love to have. Do you think Blizzard regrets the runaway success they had with WoW at its launch? Do you really think they would say "gee I wish we could have held off all those players... it would have made balancing easier"? The only regret they're likely to have is not having enough servers up and ready to go online so they wouldn't have had to ask stores to pull the boxes from the shelves 'til they could better handle the deluge.
Balancing takes place in development, in Beta and in the live game. It happens at launch, it happens 6 months down the road. It happens 6 years down the road. It's not like you "balance the game once, and that's it". It's an ongoing process.
P2P MMOs are launched as such because developers would much prefer a steady, consistent revenue stream over an inconsistent and largely unpredictable one. They go F2P because they fail as a game to maintain enough people who feel the game is worth the sub fee.
There is a reason why games convert to F2P later and not at launch. The fans of the game are going to buy the box and pay 15 bucks a month. Thats a lot of money SE would never have seen if they went F2P from launch. Also when a MMO launches you dont want to many players to start as you are working on class balance and server quality of service. 6-12 months later you got the game running smoothly. Nows the time to switch to F2P and bring in your 2nd wave of players. Now you reward the fans who have been paying for the game with some tokens. F2P players enjoy the game to max level and the restriction on F2P gets them to sub if they like the game. Everyone wins.
Oh good grief lol!
Seriously... where do you people get this nonsense from?
They launch P2P because it's their preferred revenue model. For crying out loud, there's an article linked right in my signature where Yoshi-P explains, in his own (albeit translated) words, why he chose Subs for ARR, and why such a model is preferable to cash shops.
You people aren't even trying anymore.
He very well may think it. Here is the problem. More and more MMOs are moving to the hybrid F2P system. Where you get to play the game from level 1-top level for free and then when you get to end game you need to sub if you want to join the end game community. LotR does it, SoE products do it. Im not talking about freemium games like Neverwinter that only make money from cash shops. Now you have lets say 50 people looking for a new MMO and there is 100 MMOs to pick from (I know there are a lot more) If a good majority of good MMOs out like LotR and SoE products let you try the game from free to top level. New MMOs like SWToR has taken on this model as well. Of the 50 players how many will P2P from the start + a box price? I know I would check out the games that let me try the game out first without paying.
So now if you want to get a larger share of the people now looking for a new MMO you need to offer the same system or live on gaining less players. By your post thats not what MMO companies want. FF14 will be forced to switch if they want their share of people looking for a new MMO after launch. Great thing is the F2P players are now invested in the product and a lot of them start to sub to join the P2P community to get the advantages the P2P players get from a sub. It really is a great system to keep a MMO growing.
Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Originally posted by NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
I've read your posts and it's not win win. I and many others have walked away from F2P games(with and without spending a dime). If the model is so perfect why are you even wasting your time here instead of playing one of those said games?
Edit: Especially in today market I think it would be bad for FFXIV specifically. The game starts slow (intentionally but slow none the less). We see this complaint pop-up over and over even during the beta weekends. If people have to dump a tiny bit of money into it they'll probably get to at least 20-30 where the game starts to pick up. However if it was free many would probably drop it since they would be limited and the game would be slow to start.
Originally posted by Shatter30 This game will fail as a sub MMO. If TOR couldn't survive as one as large of an IP as it is, why would this do any better when its essentially a WOW clone done worse.
SWTOR was a terrible mess because of the devs and leaders with huge egos, not listening to beta testers, a terrible engine, that's why it failed, not because it was a subscription based game. I probably won't be playing FFXIV but its nothing like SWTOR, it runs smoothly and looks beautiful. Is it worth a subscription? Who knows, only the people that play it will decide that. Just don't try to lump mmo's in with SWTOR's failure and try to pass it off as it was because it was subscription based is why it failed.
There are plenty of us willing to pay a subscription for a GOOD Mmo, we just won't pay it for mediocrity anymore.
@Nanfoodle. So what youre telling me is the developers actually WANT to start out selling at $60, have 1million+ subs drop to around 300k, lay off workers, [u]cut back and merge servers[/u] ... just so that they can later spend resources to convert to f2p hybrid later when their hard work has fallen to the $5 bin?
Yeah ima go ahead and call that b/s. I mean dam, thats one hell of a conspiracy. Its doesnt make any sense what so ever that a developer would pass on this supposed gold mine of a pricing model, go though all the hassles ive seen them go through cutting their losses, because that somehow equates to more profits? Yeah that doesnt add up. Starting out with an alleged inferior plan that makes less $ because they dont want their servers bogged up yet? Really?
How many MMOS you know of are releasing as P2P? and for theory that 'P2P is the future' to work the P2P MMOS have to stay P2P. How can P2P be the future when within a year these MMOS have trouble sustaining themselves and have to go F2P?
You make no sense at all. AAA MMOS releasing as P2P models and then going F2P just contradicts whatever you are saying here. It just strengthens the point further that P2P model isn't viable and far from being a future.
And you are ignoring a point that has been brought up time, and time.. and time... and time... and again...
P2P MMOs do not fail as such because "of their revenue model". They fail as P2P because they aren't good enough games to sustain enough players. Or, because the publishers/developers prefer fishing for whales.
If i believe in what you are saying then only good MMO to ever release was WOW. But that is not true now is it? P2P MMOS and GOOD MMOS are not mutually exclusive. You can release a MMO which is so amazing that it will cure cancer and eradicate poverty and still it would have hard time to stay afloat on pure P2P model.
There are MMOs out there that are still succeeding with subs, and doing quite fine, because they are good enough to warrant paying a sub to enough people. That's all it takes. That's all it's ever taken
For example? and please give examples of recent MMOS that are doing great on P2P model and not MMOS from 8 or 10 years ago when this model was very viable and F2P was non existant in western market.
Consider this: FFXIV 1.0 failed horribly. It's pretty much a legend in that regard. However, despite that, when SE reinstated subs for 1.0, not only did XIV not "crash and burn for good" as some warned, its player numbers actually increased. In a more recent interview, Yoshi-P stated that in the period of XIV's active subs, toward the end of 1.0, the player numbers tripled. They actually increased their playerbase, with subs, with a game that many had written off as a failure. That should tell you something. And what it should tell you is exactly what I said just before... People will pay for something if they find it worth the money.
The player number trippled after annoucement of FFXIV ARR. So that is not something to brag about. If there was no news of FFXIV being remade no one would have bothered going back to FFXIV. A lot of interest was generated in the game because of that. Trippling the subscriber base for a short period of time and sustaining that player base are two different things. However we never got the chance to see how many of those who came back would have stayed long term.
Whether FFXI "launched as a sub game when subs were still considered 'okay'", is not only a flawed argument in so many ways, it's also completely irrelevant.
Whether it's now, 10 years ago, or 10 years from now means nothing. It's all the same.
No sorry. it is not flawed argument because time period is a huge factor. P2P model was popular in days of EQ and FFXI, there is no denying that. But these has been huge change in gamer demographics and playing and paying habits. To ignore it because it doesn't suit your argument is not going to change the reality. Majority prefer F2P MMOS now compared to 8 or 10 years ago. And i do'nt even need to make thing up because it evident from more and more MMO following F2P / B2P model. How many examples you got post WOW to back up your claims?
Mind you, many MMOs that go "F2P" do so on a hybrid basis.. They maintain a subscription option (though they don't call it that.. 'cause you know... "subs" is a four letter word and all that). People know exactly what they are though. Regardless, they offer that option because it is still viable and it is still preferred by many over the nickel and dime approach of a Cash Shop. Subs also still bring in a more reliable and consistent revenue stream which certainly helps in balancing out the irregular nature of Cash Shop sales.
Please stop making stuff up. You don't know how many players actually prefer sub model over nickle and diming in hybrid models. I don't so you won't see my making any claims here. But what we do know for a fact is that all the MMOS that have gone F2P with sub as option has only seen increase in population over time. How many pure P2P MMOS except for WOW can brag about that?
It's more than obvious by now that people who want every MMO to be F2P will ignore any evidence to the contrary. That's been quite well demonstrated. Fortunately, dismissing or ignoring the facts don't make them go away
Just like how you are doing? sticking thumb in to your ears and going 'lalalala'? by the way you haven't stated any facts here..just speculation and personal opinions. You can not even give one example of successful P2P MMO from recent years
And the fact in this case is: subs are still a viable revenue model.
Really? i keep hearing that and yet time and time again people as yourself have failed to name one stable P2P MMO that released recently and didn't go belly up and turned into F2P. Got anything? ofcourse not.
Do not conflate "frequency" with "viability". One has nothing to do with the other.
Just like how being a good MMO has nothing to do with P2P model.
Here's an interesting bit of history...
Well before the F2P craze took off in the West, some sub-based MMOs failed. They didn't go F2P. They just went offline. You know why they failed? Not because "Subs were a failed revenue model". Not because "F2P was the superior option" (remember, F2P was pretty much unheard of outside of the Eastern markets). They failed for the same reason back then as they fail for now: They simply weren't good enough games to enough people to sustain themselves.
AC2 went offline because it failed to maintain enough subscribers to keep service going. Meanwhile, AC1 continued chugging along, with a sub, and continues to this day. They also brought back AC2... and people are paying subs for that now as well.
Matrix Online would have gone offline altogether if not for SOE buying it up (though I'd argue they should have let it die, because they did nothing with it until they finally decided to pull the plug.
Several NCSoft MMOs died... Auto Assault and Tabula Rasa among them.
It was the free market at work. You put out a product enough people like, you're golden. You fail to do so, and your days are numbered.
That's all it boils down to.
Subs are no less viable now than they were back then, have ever been or will ever be.
So, the F2P folks can continue spreading the lie that "subs are a flawed model" and "Sub-based MMOs fail because of the subs"... and I'm sure they will. Just realize that the rest of us know you're full of it, and why.
You think if companies knew what they do now they wouldn't have turned all those MMOS into F2P model? Tabula Rasa would be still up. Sometimes it takes only one company to take initiative. In this case it was Turbine which turned things around with DDO and saw huge boost in population and profit after going F2P. Then LOTRO followed suit and rest is history.
Keep telling yourself that the only reason a MMO loses its playerbase and goes F2P is because it isn't a good MMO and that it has nothing to do with the payment model or increased competition and huge influx of players in market in last 10 years.
But hey it is all irrelevant because Ayulin said so we should ignore all these important factors.
I believe that the day you have some solid examples of P2P MMOS that have sustained themselves successfully post WOW era... all this discussion will just die out and everyone will agree that yes P2P payment is the future or still viable. Till then it is going to be hard to make people agree with you. I for instance can not just take your word for it even though the current market shows a picture contrary to what you want us to believe.
But hey good luck trying to convince people.
"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 NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
Originally posted by Kayo45 @Nanfoodle. So what youre telling me is the developers actually WANT to start out selling at $60, have 1million+ subs drop to around 300k, lay off workers, [u]cut back and merge servers[/u] ... just so that they can later spend resources to convert to f2p hybrid later when their hard work has fallen to the $5 bin?
Yeah ima go ahead and call that b/s. I mean dam, thats one hell of a conspiracy. Its doesnt make any sense what so ever that a developer would pass on this supposed gold mine of a pricing model, go though all the hassles ive seen them go through cutting their losses, because that somehow equates to more profits? Yeah that doesnt add up. Starting out with an alleged inferior plan that makes less $ because they dont want their servers bogged up yet? Really?
Im not saying its their plan. Im saying its the way the market is going. If most MMOs go F2P hybrid with a P2P option when you get top level to join the end game community. How well you FF14 do at geaining new customers? Also the lay off thing is when a MMO is failing and they go F2P to save the business. SoE products and LotR enter into a F2P hybrid system already on a strong footing. Was business as normal. All the did was grow the player base and also got more people to sub to their game for doing so.
Originally posted by NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
I used to take your stand on cash shops. GW2 changed my mind on that. I was outraged when cash shops started to enter P2P games but here is the fact. People will pay the fees to get what they want. In WoW that sparkle pony mount on opening weekend made 25 mill. You dont think every MMO developer didnt stop and start thinking about how cash shops would effect their game? Its coming IMO. I maybe wrong but I think the entire MMO market is in the middle of a quantum shift with cash shops and F2P and F2P hybrids. I personally will play what ever is quality,P2P, F2P, B2P or freemium.
Originally posted by NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
Sure it will. Path of least resistance. The majority will always take the easiest path first, its human nature. Why do you think more and more MMOs are going F2P hybrid, even games that are doing well?
Originally posted by NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
Sure it will. Path of least resistance. The majority will always take the easiest path first, its human nature. Why do you think more and more MMOs are going F2P hybrid, even games that are doing well?
It looks like it's pointless debating about this, you have your opinion, i have mine, so i'm just going to let it go because this would go on forever and will come back full circle to the same argument. Have a nice day sir.
Originally posted by NetSage Have you ever heard the saying "If they told you to jump off a bridge..."? I mean just because the market as whole is moving that way doesn't make it the best move for everyone. So no matter what you think you know you can still be wrong.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
Sure it will. Path of least resistance. The majority will always take the easiest path first, its human nature. Why do you think more and more MMOs are going F2P hybrid, even games that are doing well?
It looks like it's pointless debating about this, you have your opinion, i have mine, so i'm just going to let it go because this would go on forever and will come back full circle to the same argument. Have a nice day sir.
Originally posted by Kayo45 @Nanfoodle. So what youre telling me is the developers actually WANT to start out selling at $60, have 1million+ subs drop to around 300k, lay off workers, [u]cut back and merge servers[/u] ... just so that they can later spend resources to convert to f2p hybrid later when their hard work has fallen to the $5 bin?
Yeah ima go ahead and call that b/s. I mean dam, thats one hell of a conspiracy. Its doesnt make any sense what so ever that a developer would pass on this supposed gold mine of a pricing model, go though all the hassles ive seen them go through cutting their losses, because that somehow equates to more profits? Yeah that doesnt add up. Starting out with an alleged inferior plan that makes less $ because they dont want their servers bogged up yet? Really?
Im not saying its their plan. Im saying its the way the market is going. If most MMOs go F2P hybrid with a P2P option when you get top level to join the end game community. How well you FF14 do at geaining new customers? Also the lay off thing is when a MMO is failing and they go F2P to save the business. SoE products and LotR enter into a F2P hybrid system already on a strong footing. Was business as normal. All the did was grow the player base and also got more people to sub to their game for doing so.
No, you clearly said thats the reason they go f2p later and not at launch. Implying, by your highlighted portion of my post, that its why SE is releasing p2p first (even though I was referencing FFXI still being p2p but ... /shrug). Regardless, whether you meant SE or any other company its a very farfetched conspiracy to think they release P2P with the full intention of going F2P later. At best they plan for it as a back up plan.
I dont know about SoE but LotRO was the first shaft I recieved with this F2P hybrid conversion thing. They were losing subs. Entire guilds were disappearing, including mine. MoM pretty much ruined the game entirely and subs were plummeting. By the time Siege of Mirkwood released ... well, I think the fact they went digital only says it all.
Like I said before, very few MMO's actually die from low subs. A developer can probably support a couple thousand subs in a single server if need be. There just comes a point where F2P becomes more profitable and the suits flip the switch. Personally, I think all these developers sell their game idea to investors and publishers (like EA and SoE) using WoWs huge success as an example. They say "billions of dollars in subs" and "we plan on getting a piece of that" yet when they dont make it ... they panic, investors scream "wtf? we're pulling out" and then they point to F2P and the promise that brings. If you really look at it, MMO's are no worse off than they were before. Take WoW out of the equation and sub numbers are more or less just as good as before despite the saturation.
Its not a coincidence that self published MMO's are the only ones that have stayed P2P (maybe the answer is there) with the exception of Rift, which lasted over 2 years (not 6-12 months) with a fraction of what other converted MMOs have had when they changed. Square with FFXI, Blizzard with WoW, CCP with EVE, and Trion Worlds with Rift ... in that sense, P2P is still ahead (1/4). The others, owned and published by EA, SoE, NCSoft, and Eidos, convert to hybrid f2p as soon as they see they wont be matching WoW.
Who knows why SE is really so dead set against it but its promising for FFXIV. At least for me and the other cash shop haters. At this point I think Yoshida would rather seppuku than see the game go F2P, lol.
Originally posted by Kayo45 @Nanfoodle. So what youre telling me is the developers actually WANT to start out selling at $60, have 1million+ subs drop to around 300k, lay off workers, [u]cut back and merge servers[/u] ... just so that they can later spend resources to convert to f2p hybrid later when their hard work has fallen to the $5 bin?
Yeah ima go ahead and call that b/s. I mean dam, thats one hell of a conspiracy. Its doesnt make any sense what so ever that a developer would pass on this supposed gold mine of a pricing model, go though all the hassles ive seen them go through cutting their losses, because that somehow equates to more profits? Yeah that doesnt add up. Starting out with an alleged inferior plan that makes less $ because they dont want their servers bogged up yet? Really?
Im not saying its their plan. Im saying its the way the market is going. If most MMOs go F2P hybrid with a P2P option when you get top level to join the end game community. How well you FF14 do at geaining new customers? Also the lay off thing is when a MMO is failing and they go F2P to save the business. SoE products and LotR enter into a F2P hybrid system already on a strong footing. Was business as normal. All the did was grow the player base and also got more people to sub to their game for doing so.
No, you clearly said thats the reason they go f2p later and not at launch. Implying, by your highlighted portion of my post, that its why SE is releasing p2p first (even though I was referencing FFXI still being p2p but ... /shrug). Regardless, whether you meant SE or any other company its a very farfetched conspiracy to think they release P2P with the full intention of going F2P later. At best they plan for it as a back up plan.
I dont know about SoE but LotRO was the first shaft I recieved with this F2P hybrid conversion thing. They were losing subs. Entire guilds were disappearing, including mine. MoM pretty much ruined the game entirely and subs were plummeting. By the time Siege of Mirkwood released ... well, I think the fact they went digital only says it all.
Like I said before, very few MMO's actually die from low subs. A developer can probably support a couple thousand subs in a single server if need be. There just comes a point where F2P becomes more profitable and the suits flip the switch. Personally, I think all these developers sell their game idea to investors and publishers (like EA and SoE) using WoWs huge success as an example. They say "billions of dollars in subs" and "we plan on getting a piece of that" yet when they dont make it ... they panic, investors scream "wtf? we're pulling out" and then they point to F2P and the promise that brings. If you really look at it, MMO's are no worse off than they were before. Take WoW out of the equation and sub numbers are more or less just as good as before despite the saturation.
Its not a coincidence that self published MMO's are the only ones that have stayed P2P (maybe the answer is there) with the exception of Rift, which lasted over 2 years (not 6-12 months) with a fraction of what other converted MMOs have had when they changed. Square with FFXI, Blizzard with WoW, CCP with EVE, and Trion Worlds with Rift ... in that sense, P2P is still ahead (1/4). The others, owned and published by EA, SoE, NCSoft, and Eidos, convert to hybrid f2p as soon as they see they wont be matching WoW.
Who knows why SE is really so dead set against it but its promising for FFXIV. At least for me and the other cash shop haters. At this point I think Yoshida would rather seppuku than see the game go F2P, lol.
I am interested to see how this all unfolds with how the MMO market is changing, quality MMOs like Everquest Next starting with F2P model. Big MMOs like WoW adding cash shops and FF14 making a stand they will never go F2P. Will be interesting.
I am interested to see how this all unfolds with how the MMO market is changing, quality MMOs like Everquest Next starting with F2P model. Big MMOs like WoW adding cash shops and FF14 making a stand they will never go F2P. Will be interesting.
Not for nothing, but you are making a lot of assumptions that aren't proven yet.
1st: SoE has released virtually nothing about EQ:N and you've already labled it a quality game. Add to that the fact that you are assuming their F2P business model is going to be a success. A Cash Shop where you can convert RMT to gold in a game that should have a player driven economy is a very steep and slippery slope. I have serious doubts they can pull that one off.
2nd: You can use "the writing's on the wall" approach to WoW's recent developments. However, they have stated this item was for the Asian markets where they don't have subscription models. And while I would be foolish to state we'll never see this in the West. It still remains your opinion and not a fact. As of now, WoW has NOT added a cash shop and have NOT stated they intend to do so in our market. You have presented it as if it's a proven fact when It still only remains a possibility.
3rd: The last part is true except the context in which you present it indicates it won't remain that way when the company's history does.
Originally posted by simulacra Just pointing out that we know nothing about Eqnext, like whether it's a quality MMO or if it's f2p
Also we have seen many companies make a firm stand on a topic only to change their stance because of many reasons, mostly money being that reason. We as gamers sometimes forget that MMOs are a business run at the top by business professionals. They dont make games just so we can have fun =-)
Originally posted by simulacra Just pointing out that we know nothing about Eqnext, like whether it's a quality MMO or if it's f2p
SOE has already made it clear that EQNEXT will be F2P. Whether it is quality MMO or not that is to be seen.
"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
There have been many. Not many are still P2P, granted, but many PTriple A MMOs have come since WoW in 2004, and a good number of the started out as P2P:
EQ2 (well it came out at the same time nearly), LOTRO, AoC, Vanguard, DDO, TERA, SWTOR, TR, MO, Aion, CoH/CoV, .....
The list goes on a good ways. Now you can argue if they were good games or not - but they all were Triple A quality, and all started as subscription.
There is a sizeable portion of the playerbase that are glad FFXIV is subscription-based with no cash shop.
As long as it doesn't have an itemshop this might just be the right thing to do. There are plenty of MMO players that hate itemshops so making it oldschool can be a large advantage as long as the game is fun.
I am interested to see how this all unfolds with how the MMO market is changing, quality MMOs like Everquest Next starting with F2P model. Big MMOs like WoW adding cash shops and FF14 making a stand they will never go F2P. Will be interesting.
Not for nothing, but you are making a lot of assumptions that aren't proven yet.
1st: SoE has released virtually nothing about EQ:N and you've already labled it a quality game. Add to that the fact that you are assuming their F2P business model is going to be a success. A Cash Shop where you can convert RMT to gold in a game that should have a player driven economy is a very steep and slippery slope. I have serious doubts they can pull that one off.
2nd: You can use "the writing's on the wall" approach to WoW's recent developments. However, they have stated this item was for the Asian markets where they don't have subscription models. And while I would be foolish to state we'll never see this in the West. It still remains your opinion and not a fact. As of now, WoW has NOT added a cash shop and have NOT stated they intend to do so in our market. You have presented it as if it's a proven fact when It still only remains a possibility.
3rd: The last part is true except the context in which you present it indicates it won't remain that way when the company's history does.
SoE has said very clearly EQN will be F2P hybrid. Also EQN unlike games like DP EQN will be a in house game and much like EQ1 and EQ2, it will be quality. I am sure of it. I stand by what I said that you quoted. It will be fun to see how this all unfolds.
I am interested to see how this all unfolds with how the MMO market is changing, quality MMOs like Everquest Next starting with F2P model. Big MMOs like WoW adding cash shops and FF14 making a stand they will never go F2P. Will be interesting.
Not for nothing, but you are making a lot of assumptions that aren't proven yet.
1st: SoE has released virtually nothing about EQ:N and you've already labled it a quality game. Add to that the fact that you are assuming their F2P business model is going to be a success. A Cash Shop where you can convert RMT to gold in a game that should have a player driven economy is a very steep and slippery slope. I have serious doubts they can pull that one off.
2nd: You can use "the writing's on the wall" approach to WoW's recent developments. However, they have stated this item was for the Asian markets where they don't have subscription models. And while I would be foolish to state we'll never see this in the West. It still remains your opinion and not a fact. As of now, WoW has NOT added a cash shop and have NOT stated they intend to do so in our market. You have presented it as if it's a proven fact when It still only remains a possibility.
3rd: The last part is true except the context in which you present it indicates it won't remain that way when the company's history does.
SoE has said very clearly EQN will be F2P hybrid. Also EQN unlike games like DP EQN will be a in house game and much like EQ1 and EQ2, it will be quality. I am sure of it. I stand by what I said that you quoted. It will be fun to see how this all unfolds.
I am not telling you that you are wrong on any points. But I am also not telling you that your are right either. All I am saying is please don't state opinions as fact.
EQN is not a quality game.........at least not yet. It may be. I hope it is. This genre needs a shot in the arm.
But why will it be fun to see if SE can maintian a P2P game or not? (Assuming you mean that you are watching from the outside)? I hope I misinterpret, but it almost sounds like you will derive a sense of satisfaction to see FF14 go F2P. If that does happen, and if your prediction for WoW pans out to be true then all of us who are wanting a P2P model with no Cash Shops will no longer have any games. F2P gamers have options, B2P gamers have options. P2P gamers have one last hope. and you would take pleasure seeing that taken?
Comments
There is a reason why games convert to F2P later and not at launch. The fans of the game are going to buy the box and pay 15 bucks a month. Thats a lot of money SE would never have seen if they went F2P from launch. Also when a MMO launches you dont want to many players to start as you are working on class balance and server quality of service. 6-12 months later you got the game running smoothly. Nows the time to switch to F2P and bring in your 2nd wave of players. Now you reward the fans who have been paying for the game with some tokens. F2P players enjoy the game to max level and the restriction on F2P gets them to sub if they like the game. Everyone wins.
Oh good grief lol!
Seriously... where do you people get this nonsense from?
They launch P2P because it's their preferred revenue model. For crying out loud, there's an article linked right in my signature where Yoshi-P explains, in his own (albeit translated) words, why he chose Subs for ARR, and why such a model is preferable to cash shops.
Yet you're here putting words in his mouth, carrying on like you have a single clue what you're talking about.
They don't want too many people at launch? Are you kidding? Having "too many people at launch" is a problem a MMO developer would love to have. Do you think Blizzard regrets the runaway success they had with WoW at its launch? Do you really think they would say "gee I wish we could have held off all those players... it would have made balancing easier"? The only regret they're likely to have is not having enough servers up and ready to go online so they wouldn't have had to ask stores to pull the boxes from the shelves 'til they could better handle the deluge.
Balancing takes place in development, in Beta and in the live game. It happens at launch, it happens 6 months down the road. It happens 6 years down the road. It's not like you "balance the game once, and that's it". It's an ongoing process.
P2P MMOs are launched as such because developers would much prefer a steady, consistent revenue stream over an inconsistent and largely unpredictable one. They go F2P because they fail as a game to maintain enough people who feel the game is worth the sub fee.
You people aren't even trying anymore.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
He very well may think it. Here is the problem. More and more MMOs are moving to the hybrid F2P system. Where you get to play the game from level 1-top level for free and then when you get to end game you need to sub if you want to join the end game community. LotR does it, SoE products do it. Im not talking about freemium games like Neverwinter that only make money from cash shops. Now you have lets say 50 people looking for a new MMO and there is 100 MMOs to pick from (I know there are a lot more) If a good majority of good MMOs out like LotR and SoE products let you try the game from free to top level. New MMOs like SWToR has taken on this model as well. Of the 50 players how many will P2P from the start + a box price? I know I would check out the games that let me try the game out first without paying.
So now if you want to get a larger share of the people now looking for a new MMO you need to offer the same system or live on gaining less players. By your post thats not what MMO companies want. FF14 will be forced to switch if they want their share of people looking for a new MMO after launch. Great thing is the F2P players are now invested in the product and a lot of them start to sub to join the P2P community to get the advantages the P2P players get from a sub. It really is a great system to keep a MMO growing.
Read my whole post above why they will have to take that jump as well. They want their share of people looking for a new game after launch they will have to make that move as well. Of corse I can be wrong as well =-) We just having a friendly chat on our views of the F2P system. Im not trying to tell SE what to do and I am happy to P2P. The game is fun and a quality product. I just think a hybrid P2P system could make the game better. Heck even friends you want to play with you. How much more likely would they come try the game if you told them they could try it from free from level 1-max level? If they like the game, when they get to max level then you sub. WIn win!
I've read your posts and it's not win win. I and many others have walked away from F2P games(with and without spending a dime). If the model is so perfect why are you even wasting your time here instead of playing one of those said games?
Edit: Especially in today market I think it would be bad for FFXIV specifically. The game starts slow (intentionally but slow none the less). We see this complaint pop-up over and over even during the beta weekends. If people have to dump a tiny bit of money into it they'll probably get to at least 20-30 where the game starts to pick up. However if it was free many would probably drop it since they would be limited and the game would be slow to start.
SWTOR was a terrible mess because of the devs and leaders with huge egos, not listening to beta testers, a terrible engine, that's why it failed, not because it was a subscription based game. I probably won't be playing FFXIV but its nothing like SWTOR, it runs smoothly and looks beautiful. Is it worth a subscription? Who knows, only the people that play it will decide that. Just don't try to lump mmo's in with SWTOR's failure and try to pass it off as it was because it was subscription based is why it failed.
There are plenty of us willing to pay a subscription for a GOOD Mmo, we just won't pay it for mediocrity anymore.
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
Yeah ima go ahead and call that b/s. I mean dam, thats one hell of a conspiracy. Its doesnt make any sense what so ever that a developer would pass on this supposed gold mine of a pricing model, go though all the hassles ive seen them go through cutting their losses, because that somehow equates to more profits? Yeah that doesnt add up. Starting out with an alleged inferior plan that makes less $ because they dont want their servers bogged up yet? Really?
You think if companies knew what they do now they wouldn't have turned all those MMOS into F2P model? Tabula Rasa would be still up. Sometimes it takes only one company to take initiative. In this case it was Turbine which turned things around with DDO and saw huge boost in population and profit after going F2P. Then LOTRO followed suit and rest is history.
Keep telling yourself that the only reason a MMO loses its playerbase and goes F2P is because it isn't a good MMO and that it has nothing to do with the payment model or increased competition and huge influx of players in market in last 10 years.
But hey it is all irrelevant because Ayulin said so we should ignore all these important factors.
I believe that the day you have some solid examples of P2P MMOS that have sustained themselves successfully post WOW era... all this discussion will just die out and everyone will agree that yes P2P payment is the future or still viable. Till then it is going to be hard to make people agree with you. I for instance can not just take your word for it even though the current market shows a picture contrary to what you want us to believe.
But hey good luck trying to convince people.
"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
You make some really good points, but it's really not that simple. In the cases that you brought up, LOTR and EQ2, the games were dying, they had to go that route. WOW isnt dying, they are just losing subs, why would they risk gauranteed money and going for what ifs, it's not plausible because you can't assume they will increase subs going that route. You also have to take into account there are many people that prefer P2P only, nothing more. No cash shops whatsoever. I for one, will not play a game with a cash shop ever again. People say you don't have to use it, but, it's not that easy. Temptation is a beesh. Again, you make some very good points but It really depends on the situations that the games are in. You may very well be right in certain conditions but with WOW, they would be stupid to go FTP. Even losing 45 mil a month like you say, they still have guranteed 5 or 6 times that, they would be stupid to take a risk and go for the what if route. You can't honestly tell me it's a guarantee that they will increase subs going your route.
Im not saying its their plan. Im saying its the way the market is going. If most MMOs go F2P hybrid with a P2P option when you get top level to join the end game community. How well you FF14 do at geaining new customers? Also the lay off thing is when a MMO is failing and they go F2P to save the business. SoE products and LotR enter into a F2P hybrid system already on a strong footing. Was business as normal. All the did was grow the player base and also got more people to sub to their game for doing so.
I used to take your stand on cash shops. GW2 changed my mind on that. I was outraged when cash shops started to enter P2P games but here is the fact. People will pay the fees to get what they want. In WoW that sparkle pony mount on opening weekend made 25 mill. You dont think every MMO developer didnt stop and start thinking about how cash shops would effect their game? Its coming IMO. I maybe wrong but I think the entire MMO market is in the middle of a quantum shift with cash shops and F2P and F2P hybrids. I personally will play what ever is quality,P2P, F2P, B2P or freemium.
Sure it will. Path of least resistance. The majority will always take the easiest path first, its human nature. Why do you think more and more MMOs are going F2P hybrid, even games that are doing well?
It looks like it's pointless debating about this, you have your opinion, i have mine, so i'm just going to let it go because this would go on forever and will come back full circle to the same argument. Have a nice day sir.
Sure, was fun talking with you =-)
No, you clearly said thats the reason they go f2p later and not at launch. Implying, by your highlighted portion of my post, that its why SE is releasing p2p first (even though I was referencing FFXI still being p2p but ... /shrug). Regardless, whether you meant SE or any other company its a very farfetched conspiracy to think they release P2P with the full intention of going F2P later. At best they plan for it as a back up plan.
I dont know about SoE but LotRO was the first shaft I recieved with this F2P hybrid conversion thing. They were losing subs. Entire guilds were disappearing, including mine. MoM pretty much ruined the game entirely and subs were plummeting. By the time Siege of Mirkwood released ... well, I think the fact they went digital only says it all.
Like I said before, very few MMO's actually die from low subs. A developer can probably support a couple thousand subs in a single server if need be. There just comes a point where F2P becomes more profitable and the suits flip the switch. Personally, I think all these developers sell their game idea to investors and publishers (like EA and SoE) using WoWs huge success as an example. They say "billions of dollars in subs" and "we plan on getting a piece of that" yet when they dont make it ... they panic, investors scream "wtf? we're pulling out" and then they point to F2P and the promise that brings. If you really look at it, MMO's are no worse off than they were before. Take WoW out of the equation and sub numbers are more or less just as good as before despite the saturation.
Its not a coincidence that self published MMO's are the only ones that have stayed P2P (maybe the answer is there) with the exception of Rift, which lasted over 2 years (not 6-12 months) with a fraction of what other converted MMOs have had when they changed. Square with FFXI, Blizzard with WoW, CCP with EVE, and Trion Worlds with Rift ... in that sense, P2P is still ahead (1/4). The others, owned and published by EA, SoE, NCSoft, and Eidos, convert to hybrid f2p as soon as they see they wont be matching WoW.
Who knows why SE is really so dead set against it but its promising for FFXIV. At least for me and the other cash shop haters. At this point I think Yoshida would rather seppuku than see the game go F2P, lol.
I am interested to see how this all unfolds with how the MMO market is changing, quality MMOs like Everquest Next starting with F2P model. Big MMOs like WoW adding cash shops and FF14 making a stand they will never go F2P. Will be interesting.
Not for nothing, but you are making a lot of assumptions that aren't proven yet.
1st: SoE has released virtually nothing about EQ:N and you've already labled it a quality game. Add to that the fact that you are assuming their F2P business model is going to be a success. A Cash Shop where you can convert RMT to gold in a game that should have a player driven economy is a very steep and slippery slope. I have serious doubts they can pull that one off.
2nd: You can use "the writing's on the wall" approach to WoW's recent developments. However, they have stated this item was for the Asian markets where they don't have subscription models. And while I would be foolish to state we'll never see this in the West. It still remains your opinion and not a fact. As of now, WoW has NOT added a cash shop and have NOT stated they intend to do so in our market. You have presented it as if it's a proven fact when It still only remains a possibility.
3rd: The last part is true except the context in which you present it indicates it won't remain that way when the company's history does.
Also we have seen many companies make a firm stand on a topic only to change their stance because of many reasons, mostly money being that reason. We as gamers sometimes forget that MMOs are a business run at the top by business professionals. They dont make games just so we can have fun =-)
SOE has already made it clear that EQNEXT will be F2P. Whether it is quality MMO or not that is to be seen.
"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
As long as it doesn't have an itemshop this might just be the right thing to do. There are plenty of MMO players that hate itemshops so making it oldschool can be a large advantage as long as the game is fun.
SoE has said very clearly EQN will be F2P hybrid. Also EQN unlike games like DP EQN will be a in house game and much like EQ1 and EQ2, it will be quality. I am sure of it. I stand by what I said that you quoted. It will be fun to see how this all unfolds.
I am not telling you that you are wrong on any points. But I am also not telling you that your are right either. All I am saying is please don't state opinions as fact.
EQN is not a quality game.........at least not yet. It may be. I hope it is. This genre needs a shot in the arm.
But why will it be fun to see if SE can maintian a P2P game or not? (Assuming you mean that you are watching from the outside)? I hope I misinterpret, but it almost sounds like you will derive a sense of satisfaction to see FF14 go F2P. If that does happen, and if your prediction for WoW pans out to be true then all of us who are wanting a P2P model with no Cash Shops will no longer have any games. F2P gamers have options, B2P gamers have options. P2P gamers have one last hope. and you would take pleasure seeing that taken?