Originally posted by uidcaustic5 Who said it was? Oh.. right.. people on here.
People on here? nope..the market proved it.
Where is this proof?
Huh? the amount of MMOS that went P2P isn't proof enough for you? you think companies would continue to follow F2P model without doing their research and knowing that it is a profitable model for them. Seriously.
I agree, P2P is best.
So other than quoting the obvious typo..do you even have an argument?
I'm still waiting on proof beyond your opinion.
The picture that current market shows and how F2P MMOS outnumber P2P models isn't matter of opinion but a fact. Industry follows success and if P2P model was so successful the market would show a different picture.
There is only ONE pure sub P2P model MMO that we know of and that is FFXIV. Wildstar offer CREDDS as an option along with sub so it isn't even in same category.
When you look at the current picture painted by MMO market i wonder how you can even say 'it is just your opinion' with a straight face.
"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
Why are the majority of AAA MMO's releasing with aspirations of being P2P? Regardless of people's predictions of how many months til a games "inevitable" conversion to a F2P cash shop, P2P is still and will always be the preferred business model for game makers. It benefits the devs and players alike, and if a game has the longevity and the fun factor built into it you should be required to compensate the game makers for providing you this service.
If people want to be nickel and dimed for content that should already be available to them for a small fee each month, more power to them. If kiddies can't get their parents to cough up a credit card so they can game, I say get a damn job. The problem with P2P isn't the business model, it is the fact that there have been no games released in recent memory worth paying a sub for.
Nothing in life is free except the grace and favor of the Lord. Support the developers that give you hours of entertainment. Long live P2P! Huzzah!
My guess:
f2p is more profitable in the long run - however, companies may have figured out that people tend to 'ramp up' on their cash shop spending - they may enter games more wary and thus in the first months of a games release, they may not need the cash shop or may not want to drop money on the game until they know its something they are going to invest time in.
Therefore, it may be more profitable to begin as a sub, then after several months and they have a crowd 'hooked' - they switch to f2p.
Any cost to transition with any of those games may have been absorbed in development at this point - i.e. this was their plan all along, and therefore the game is ultimately designed around a f2p concept.
Originally posted by uidcaustic5 Who said it was? Oh.. right.. people on here.
People on here? nope..the market proved it.
Where is this proof?
Huh? the amount of MMOS that went P2P isn't proof enough for you? you think companies would continue to follow F2P model without doing their research and knowing that it is a profitable model for them. Seriously.
I agree, P2P is best.
So other than quoting the obvious typo..do you even have an argument?
I'm still waiting on proof beyond your opinion.
The picture that current market shows and how F2P MMOS outnumber P2P models isn't matter of opinion but a fact. Industry follows success and if P2P model was so successful the market would show a different picture.
There is only ONE pure sub P2P model MMO that we know of and that is FFXIV. Wildstar offer CREDDS as an option along with sub so it isn't even in same category.
When you look at the current picture painted by MMO market i wonder how you can even say 'it is just your opinion' with a straight face.
More people believe in God than don't, that is not proof of the existence of such a creature. Going to need to see quarterly earnings and cost reports ( including all overheads ) provided by their respective companies, not third party sites. Until then, your opinion is nothing more than that.
Do you see the irony in your statement? do you have quarterly earnings of of all the new P2P MMOS to show that this model is indeed profitable? oh no you can not because majority of those went F2P..ahahaha!!
Again not 'my opinion' but the current market trend. I am pretty sure F2P model is working great for these companies or the next AAA sandbox title like EQNEXT won't be a F2P game and P2P MMOS would be flooding the market. But all we got is a little trickle known as FFXIV.
"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
FFXIV and Square Enix are the ONLY ones not using cash shop at all.They will not have a contingency plan to go f2p either.
Their plan will be to fix the game as already shown if it is not a success or something drastic will happen.It is definitely not out of the realm it could go f2p or cash shop,but i am 100% certain they are not thinking that route at all.I am however 100% certain a game like Wildstar not only is thinking about it but has it planned out for a certain time frame.I believe they are thinking 3-4 months to max out sales and subs,then they will evaluate their business model.most business work in quarterlies,then people get fired or promoted lol.
Developers and marketing teams and media will tell you whatever works for them,they are not going to tell you the truth unless it works for them.You think some media outlet is going to get a developer interview then criticize their pay model,not going to happen,one hand feeds the other.
There is no such thing as free to play,money has to come from somewhere.It is a sloppy business model,the players never know the actual cost to enjoy the game as intended and the developer never knows how much money is coming at any given time.Developers are not dumb,not knowing the actual money mean they will design the game to operate accordingly,meaning your game will not be to it's fullest potential.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Originally posted by uidcaustic5 Who said it was? Oh.. right.. people on here.
People on here? nope..the market proved it.
Where is this proof?
Huh? the amount of MMOS that went P2P isn't proof enough for you? you think companies would continue to follow F2P model without doing their research and knowing that it is a profitable model for them. Seriously.
I agree, P2P is best.
So other than quoting the obvious typo..do you even have an argument?
I'm still waiting on proof beyond your opinion.
The picture that current market shows and how F2P MMOS outnumber P2P models isn't matter of opinion but a fact. Industry follows success and if P2P model was so successful the market would show a different picture.
There is only ONE pure sub P2P model MMO that we know of and that is FFXIV. Wildstar offer CREDDS as an option along with sub so it isn't even in same category.
When you look at the current picture painted by MMO market i wonder how you can even say 'it is just your opinion' with a straight face.
More people believe in God than don't, that is not proof of the existence of such a creature. Going to need to see quarterly earnings and cost reports ( including all overheads ) provided by their respective companies, not third party sites. Until then, your opinion is nothing more than that.
Do you see the irony in your statement? do you have quarterly earnings of of all the new P2P MMOS to show that this model is indeed profitable? oh no you can not because majority of those went F2P..ahahaha!!
Again not 'my opinion' but the current market trend. I am pretty sure F2P model is working great for these companies or the next AAA sandbox title like EQNEXT won't be a F2P game and P2P MMOS would be flooding the market. But all we got is a little trickle known as FFXIV.
Still no financials to support your opinion? Neato.
Are you trolling me bro? if you believe F2P isn't profitable and P2P is that means you have the financial records to prove your point..so why don't you show me something from recent P2P MMO release and i will shut up.
How about that for 'neato'? you are like an ostrich with head burried in the sand.
"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
"The F2P games industry makes more money than the subscription games industry."
Who could have guessed that 1000 to 2000 games (F2P) would make more money than 5 or 6 (P2P) ?
Perhaps the MMO game developers are not as dumb as most people here seem to believe. They clearly believe the subscription payment model is a better option. They are right of course. It is a better option, but only if your game is good enough to attract (and keep) a substantial playerbase.
SWTOR was not good enough to keep the masses of players they needed to meet their earnings targets. They blew it, and had to switch to F2P to try and recoup their substantial investment.
TSW also missed their mark, but their earning projections were not realistic. The game seems to have stabilised quite well as B2P and Cash-Shop-Lite.
Very few games will have that "certain magic" that keeps a substantial playerbase entertained for long periods while charging a sub. Many will try, most will fail. But that's no reason to stop trying.
Are you trolling me bro? if you believe F2P isn't profitable and P2P is that means you have the financial records to prove your point..so why don't you show me something from recent P2P MMO release and i will shut up.
How about that for 'neato'? you are like an ostrich with head burried in the sand.
As I said before, it really depends. When there are 1000 F2P games and 2 P2P being P2P might be a good idea.
DDO really did best the first year after it converted when there were few western games that were F2P. It still earns plenty of money but not as much.
If there are about the same of both then F2P will earn more since some people buy stuff like there is no tomorrow.
However a great game will earn money no matter what model you use.
I don't recall claiming one way or the other, literacy is an amazing thing isn't it?
Waiting on those financials to back up your opinion kiddo.
I am 34 years old by the way but thanks for assuming that i am a 'kiddo'. It is typical to resort to back handed insults when you run out of things to say.
You did claim that F2P is most profitable business model because players here on these forums say so to which i simply replied saying that the market trend proves it regardless of what posters say on forums. Only because you continue to refuse the way market is working right now won't change the fact that F2P is preferred model by majority. As proven by F2P models outnumbering P2P ones. Companies don't just make such big financial decisions without doing their research. yeah literacy is indeed an amazing thing so is the ability to comprehend.
But please continue to repeat yourself like a broken record about 'financial records' even though you yourself have none.
A new account made today just to post 'P2P is the besstt!!' i should have known better.
"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
I've said it before and I'll say it again, F2P kills MMOs.
You will end up spending MORE money being nickle and dimed to death in a F2P MMO's cash shop then paying $10-$20 dollars a month. It's a no brainer. P2P is full access to the game, no restrictions.
Cash shops encourage P2W. And no, "time savers" like XP boosts are Pay 2 Win. People who say that time savers are not P2W are fooling themselves. Companies that include this kind of BS in their games, end up scaling the time it would take to level up, farm by x10 the amount. You would end up farming for months on end for MANY, MANY GAMES unless you bought their XP Boosters.
Oh and guess what? You might as well throw your money out the window when buying items from a cash shop, because the company can easily make newer and better items, and you just wasted $50 on that sword of darkness +1 when there is a sword of bigger darkness +10.
Not only that but cash shops kill immersion.
No one should be supporting cash shops and this is one of the reasons why MMOs suck balls nowadays. Instead of buying the full game, you have to pay for ingame items in order to stay competitive.
Supporters of F2P are fooling themselves and I bet most of them already have blown $400+ on stupid ingame items, its a damn shame and ruins the spirit of gaming.
Nah i am done replying. He can have the last word. Not in mood to be trolled further.
When people resort to personal attacks you know it is time to walk away.
Originally posted by uidcaustic5
I am 34 years old by the way but thanks for assuming that i am a 'kiddo'. It is typical to resort back handed insults when you run out of things to say.
You did claim that F2P is most profitable business model because players here on these forums say so to which i simply replied saying that the market trend proves it regardless of what posters say on forums. Only because you continue to refuse the way market is working right now won't change the fact that F2P is preferred model by majority. As proven by F2P models outnumbering P2P ones. Companies don't just make such big financial decisions without doing their research.
But please continue to repeat yourself like a broken record about 'financial records' even though you yourself have none.
A new account made today just to post 'P2P is the besstt!!' i should have known better.
Actually I said that people on here claim that F2P is the most profitable model, I didn't throw my hat in either direction.
So, about those financial statements? Kiddo?
Umm that is one full complete sentence ..let me repost it for you..'You did claim that F2P is most profitable business model because players here on these forums say so to which i simply replied saying that the market trend proves it regardless of what posters say on forums. '
Learn to read a sentence please. 'Because' exists for a reason..so much for literacy being an amazing thing....
"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
People are seeing and realizing f2p is nothing more then "subsidized" gaming and gamers thank god are now starting to make real decisions regarding that. Such as, do they support paying for another's gaming habits, do they get anything in return for supporting the person to their left and right?
Few, if any, people would subsidize another's gaming habits with little to no reward for themself.
I failed to locate a AAA mmo on that list, though I did see a few that aspired to P2P but fell to their own short comings. FF XIV, Wildstar, and ESO are all releasing as P2P. I would consider those AAA games. I suppose it's a matter of one's opinion on what a quality AAA game is, my apologies for using my opinion as a blanket statement!
The question remains however...if the three games I mentioned are releasing as P2P, do you think they have made a grievous error in profitability? Because as I see it, if they maintain healthy subscription numbers...will it not be a more profitable and sound endeavor for them? I know I personally take comfort in knowing my monthly budget amount before the bills start rolling in...instead of worrying about selling enough lemonades at my stand to keep my electricity on next month.
There is nothing wrong with what you said. I agree 100%. You just have good taste that's all.
"The King and the Pawn return to the same box at the end of the game"
I've said it before and I'll say it again, F2P kills MMOs.
Not only kills them, slows innovation.
F2P is a cash grab. It's about sheer profits. We have many 2nd tier MMOs now, because it's cheap to throw some concepts together that's been tried out in WoW, and rehash them in another game. Just add PvP to it, and don't even need to add even new art assets, the players are the content.
Just look at all the PvP games. See any PvE game on the list that wasn't made prior to 2008, that's prime focus IS PvE?
Without that PvE innovation stalls. There's but a few games left that focuses on it. Folks chased that pewpewpew rabbit, and what we have to show for it is weaker and weaker MMOs, as PvP isn't designed to innovate, it's cheap programming filler.
I failed to locate a AAA mmo on that list, though I did see a few that aspired to P2P but fell to their own short comings. FF XIV, Wildstar, and ESO are all releasing as P2P. I would consider those AAA games. I suppose it's a matter of one's opinion on what a quality AAA game is, my apologies for using my opinion as a blanket statement!
The question remains however...if the three games I mentioned are releasing as P2P, do you think they have made a grievous error in profitability? Because as I see it, if they maintain healthy subscription numbers...will it not be a more profitable and sound endeavor for them? I know I personally take comfort in knowing my monthly budget amount before the bills start rolling in...instead of worrying about selling enough lemonades at my stand to keep my electricity on next month.
There is nothing wrong with what you said. I agree 100%. You just have good taste that's all.
Ty sir. Yes I made this post originally to mock the claim that because there are a plethora of F2P games generating income vs the few P2P that are successful...that somehow F2P is the better business model and that this is the way of the future. That is just a false claim. There have been F2P crap games available as long as I can remember...I believe I had Aika on my computer at the same time as WoW and FF XI. Games go F2P because it is the better business model for an mmo that wasn't successful enough to merit paying every month to play.
Games aren't releasing as F2P because it is the best business model for a SUCCESSFUL game...they are F2P because they have to get whatever money they can out of their crap product. There is no scenario in which a P2P game with respectable subscription numbers is less profitable than F2P. P2P games will always be released and the successful ones will flourish because of that business model. It is a better player base, better game service, better all around. People will gladly go P2P for an exceptional game. The problem has been since 2004, there are a serious lack of games worth subbing to...not the business model itself.
And to those that say..."Oh you fools, paying all those fees to play a game. I'm going to play when it's free in 6 months...bahaha" If the game wasnt worth you purchasing or paying a fee to play in the first place...wtf are you playing it for 6 months later? Get a life. Show some couth, and quit moving through life with your hand out. When a business provides you with a service that benefits you.....YOU SHOULD COMPENSATE THEM. smh
And to those that say..."Oh you fools, paying all those fees to play a game. I'm going to play when it's free in 6 months...bahaha" If the game wasnt worth you purchasing or paying a fee to play in the first place...wtf are you playing it for 6 months later? Get a life. Show some couth, and quit moving through life with your hand out. When a business provides you with a service that benefits you.....YOU SHOULD COMPENSATE THEM. smh
Not when a business practically begging me to play for free.
It is a free world. Devs don't need to offer anything for free. At the same time, if they do, there is little reason not to take it.
So what if a game is worth a sub. If they are offered to me for free, it is even better ... i am playing a sub-worthy game for free.
And if it is not fun for me, i won't touch it.
I pay for SP games. I pay for michelin star restaruants. I pay for private schools for my kids. But MMOs? Why should i pay a dime when i get the same amount of fun for free? Heck, i get MORE fun in f2p games. I like Star Trek, tell me a p2p alternative of STO? There is none.
Of the 3 Titles you mentioned only one will never go to F2P regardless of profitability.
FF11 has ran for over 10 years on a sub based model, and FF14 will also run on a sub model for the duration of it's service. I do not see Square/Enix ever moving away from this model regardless of profits ever. FF14 is a P2P game for life, everyone will just have to deal with it.
Wildstar, NCSoft has a habit of attempting to go the P2P route only to cave in after a while and toss it's games up to the cash shop crowd as was the case with Aion in 2.0. Wildstar however might be good enough to stay P2P for quite some time, but it will eventually go to the cash shop model.
ESO, who knows Bethesda is a good game company, they make quality stuff. Can ESO stand up to all the games releasing like EQNext, Wildstar, FFXIV and keep itself in a P2P slot, I guess only time will tell. I hope it does, ESO has potential but I think as a cash shop title it won't be as good as it could be.
And to those that say..."Oh you fools, paying all those fees to play a game. I'm going to play when it's free in 6 months...bahaha" If the game wasnt worth you purchasing or paying a fee to play in the first place...wtf are you playing it for 6 months later? Get a life. Show some couth, and quit moving through life with your hand out. When a business provides you with a service that benefits you.....YOU SHOULD COMPENSATE THEM. smh
Not when a business practically begging me to play for free.
It is a free world. Devs don't need to offer anything for free. At the same time, if they do, there is little reason not to take it.
So what if a game is worth a sub. If they are offered to me for free, it is even better ... i am playing a sub-worthy game for free.
And if it is not fun for me, i won't touch it.
I pay for SP games. I pay for michelin star restaruants. I pay for private schools for my kids. But MMOs? Why should i pay a dime when i get the same amount of fun for free? Heck, i get MORE fun in f2p games. I like Star Trek, tell me a p2p alternative of STO? There is none.
I think STO is one of the best examples a person to give to show how F2P changes the kinds of activities developers create for players. Maybe your happy with things like multiple game currencies designed for the sole purpose of inserting real world money into the game economy and grind activities designed to make life as a free player in the game as difficult as possible and if so more power to you but I don't know how someone who says they understand the value of things like private school vs public school or a good meal vs fast food would not understand that some of us don't and would rather play a game where the developers focus is on keeping us happy and playing the game long term (subbing) rather than trying to see how many cash shop sales they can drum up that month? I'm willing to pay a sub for such a game as I get value out of it, if you get just as much value out of F2P games than that's great, there are plenty of those types of games on the market and more to come for sure. I don't think asking for a handful of decent P2P games is to much.
I pay for SP games. I pay for michelin star restaruants. I pay for private schools for my kids. But MMOs? Why should i pay a dime when i get the same amount of fun for free? Heck, i get MORE fun in f2p games. I like Star Trek, tell me a p2p alternative of STO? There is none.
I think STO is one of the best examples a person to give to show how F2P changes the kinds of activities developers create for players. Maybe your happy with things like multiple game currencies designed for the sole purpose of inserting real world money into the game economy and grind activities designed to make life as a free player in the game as difficult as possible and if so more power to you but I don't know how someone who says they understand the value of things like private school vs public school or a good meal vs fast food would not understand that some of us don't and would rather play a game where the developers focus is on keeping us happy and playing the game long term (subbing) rather than trying to see how many cash shop sales they can drum up that month? I'm willing to pay a sub for such a game as I get value out of it, if you get just as much value out of F2P games than that's great, there are plenty of those types of games on the market and more to come for sure. I don't think asking for a handful of decent P2P games is to much.
Oh .. i understand why you prefer p2p. I just don't share that preference.
STO ... currency don't concern me. i got my your free star ship, and free officers. And i am playing through the story mission solo. There is no grind. Each mission is going to be done only once. The game is easy enough that i don't need any paid advantage.
And i expect i will "finish" the game eventually. So that is pure free fun for me.
Take Marvel Heroes as another example. I already finished the story content with one hero. That is 30 hours of free fun for me. I don't see a reason why i should not enjoy it when i find beating up The Hand ninjas with daredevil fun.
Now i never say you should not ask for p2p games to play. It is your preferences, not mine. But it is fair to point out that the market is going the opposite direction (and we can debate that). And it is also fair game to state that don't expect me to play/support that handful of p2p MMOs.
I have a feeling FFXIV will have no problems being P2P. The website can't even keep up with demand for early access codes
I don't really like F2P games, they seem to always end up putting more time into a helmet or mount or something that I don't want or need, instead of creating new content, which I really need.
And to those that say..."Oh you fools, paying all those fees to play a game. I'm going to play when it's free in 6 months...bahaha" If the game wasnt worth you purchasing or paying a fee to play in the first place...wtf are you playing it for 6 months later? Get a life. Show some couth, and quit moving through life with your hand out. When a business provides you with a service that benefits you.....YOU SHOULD COMPENSATE THEM. smh
Not when a business practically begging me to play for free.
It is a free world. Devs don't need to offer anything for free. At the same time, if they do, there is little reason not to take it.
So what if a game is worth a sub. If they are offered to me for free, it is even better ... i am playing a sub-worthy game for free.
And if it is not fun for me, i won't touch it.
I pay for SP games. I pay for michelin star restaruants. I pay for private schools for my kids. But MMOs? Why should i pay a dime when i get the same amount of fun for free? Heck, i get MORE fun in f2p games. I like Star Trek, tell me a p2p alternative of STO? There is none.
Is a game truly sub-worthy if it had to convert to being F2P to generate income? Again, I stress this...the problem isn't with the payment methods, and that there are no longer enough people willing to pay a monthly fee. The problem is that there hasn't been a game since 2004 worth paying for in the long run. No one has duplicated WoW's success. MANY have tried. But because many have failed, that does not mean that someday there won't be another game to have that kind of staying power using a P2P revenue model.
There are many reasons to not take games for free. Provide revenue to the game maker, so as to pay their employees and generate new meaningful content are two that come to mind.
I get it though, you have found a F2P game that you can get everything you want out of entertainment wise...for free. I have no problem with you finding your entertainment that way. The problem I and many others have is that we do not get the same level of entertainment from the F2P market. It is also a market that has the capacity for shady business....overpriced fluff, P2W, pay to progress. That is not the future of exceptional games...just the mass produced asian grinds and titles that weren't up to snuff to remain P2P. If it IS the future...God help us all.....
There probably is some mathematical, logical formula based on the development cost and cost of maintaining the game which shows the level of subs needed for a game to make more profit than would be generated for a f2p. I actually don't think it would be that difficult to figure out provided you had access to the aforementioned data across several dozen games.
That being said, why wouldn't a game launch as p2p? These days getting 2 million players in a month is pretty common, that is 2 million people all buying the game, an enormous amount of cash that pretty much covers all development. In 6 months to a year when there is 50-500k subs (like almost every other game on the market, a much more realistic level of subs, based on all the other games and the time they have been out), would it still be more profitable as a sub?
Face it. This is the new business model. P2p on launch to reap income from initial launch sales which are astronomically huge, and f2p with cs, or p2p with cs down the road to maintain the income.
In an age where games cost 50-100 million+ to develop (vs 10 million of yesteryear), and still most games have between 50-500k subs, it is highly unlikley that subs alone are capable of maintaining the profit demanded to maintain the game. Not impossible just unlikely. Therefore they either need to lower the development cost or find a way to generate more income. So far they found a way to generate more income.
To expect that a game, any game will maintain greater than 500,000 subs when so few games have ever even made it that far, is just not realistic. The companies now know this as well.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Comments
The picture that current market shows and how F2P MMOS outnumber P2P models isn't matter of opinion but a fact. Industry follows success and if P2P model was so successful the market would show a different picture.
There is only ONE pure sub P2P model MMO that we know of and that is FFXIV. Wildstar offer CREDDS as an option along with sub so it isn't even in same category.
When you look at the current picture painted by MMO market i wonder how you can even say 'it is just your opinion' with a straight face.
"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
My guess:
f2p is more profitable in the long run - however, companies may have figured out that people tend to 'ramp up' on their cash shop spending - they may enter games more wary and thus in the first months of a games release, they may not need the cash shop or may not want to drop money on the game until they know its something they are going to invest time in.
Therefore, it may be more profitable to begin as a sub, then after several months and they have a crowd 'hooked' - they switch to f2p.
Any cost to transition with any of those games may have been absorbed in development at this point - i.e. this was their plan all along, and therefore the game is ultimately designed around a f2p concept.
Do you see the irony in your statement? do you have quarterly earnings of of all the new P2P MMOS to show that this model is indeed profitable? oh no you can not because majority of those went F2P..ahahaha!!
Again not 'my opinion' but the current market trend. I am pretty sure F2P model is working great for these companies or the next AAA sandbox title like EQNEXT won't be a F2P game and P2P MMOS would be flooding the market. But all we got is a little trickle known as FFXIV.
"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
FFXIV and Square Enix are the ONLY ones not using cash shop at all.They will not have a contingency plan to go f2p either.
Their plan will be to fix the game as already shown if it is not a success or something drastic will happen.It is definitely not out of the realm it could go f2p or cash shop,but i am 100% certain they are not thinking that route at all.I am however 100% certain a game like Wildstar not only is thinking about it but has it planned out for a certain time frame.I believe they are thinking 3-4 months to max out sales and subs,then they will evaluate their business model.most business work in quarterlies,then people get fired or promoted lol.
Developers and marketing teams and media will tell you whatever works for them,they are not going to tell you the truth unless it works for them.You think some media outlet is going to get a developer interview then criticize their pay model,not going to happen,one hand feeds the other.
There is no such thing as free to play,money has to come from somewhere.It is a sloppy business model,the players never know the actual cost to enjoy the game as intended and the developer never knows how much money is coming at any given time.Developers are not dumb,not knowing the actual money mean they will design the game to operate accordingly,meaning your game will not be to it's fullest potential.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Are you trolling me bro? if you believe F2P isn't profitable and P2P is that means you have the financial records to prove your point..so why don't you show me something from recent P2P MMO release and i will shut up.
How about that for 'neato'? you are like an ostrich with head burried in the sand.
"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
"The F2P games industry makes more money than the subscription games industry."
Who could have guessed that 1000 to 2000 games (F2P) would make more money than 5 or 6 (P2P) ?
Perhaps the MMO game developers are not as dumb as most people here seem to believe. They clearly believe the subscription payment model is a better option. They are right of course. It is a better option, but only if your game is good enough to attract (and keep) a substantial playerbase.
SWTOR was not good enough to keep the masses of players they needed to meet their earnings targets. They blew it, and had to switch to F2P to try and recoup their substantial investment.
TSW also missed their mark, but their earning projections were not realistic. The game seems to have stabilised quite well as B2P and Cash-Shop-Lite.
Very few games will have that "certain magic" that keeps a substantial playerbase entertained for long periods while charging a sub. Many will try, most will fail. But that's no reason to stop trying.
As I said before, it really depends. When there are 1000 F2P games and 2 P2P being P2P might be a good idea.
DDO really did best the first year after it converted when there were few western games that were F2P. It still earns plenty of money but not as much.
If there are about the same of both then F2P will earn more since some people buy stuff like there is no tomorrow.
However a great game will earn money no matter what model you use.
I am 34 years old by the way but thanks for assuming that i am a 'kiddo'. It is typical to resort to back handed insults when you run out of things to say.
You did claim that F2P is most profitable business model because players here on these forums say so to which i simply replied saying that the market trend proves it regardless of what posters say on forums. Only because you continue to refuse the way market is working right now won't change the fact that F2P is preferred model by majority. As proven by F2P models outnumbering P2P ones. Companies don't just make such big financial decisions without doing their research. yeah literacy is indeed an amazing thing so is the ability to comprehend.
But please continue to repeat yourself like a broken record about 'financial records' even though you yourself have none.
A new account made today just to post 'P2P is the besstt!!' i should have known better.
"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
No one should support F2P!!!!
I've said it before and I'll say it again, F2P kills MMOs.
You will end up spending MORE money being nickle and dimed to death in a F2P MMO's cash shop then paying $10-$20 dollars a month. It's a no brainer. P2P is full access to the game, no restrictions.
Cash shops encourage P2W. And no, "time savers" like XP boosts are Pay 2 Win. People who say that time savers are not P2W are fooling themselves. Companies that include this kind of BS in their games, end up scaling the time it would take to level up, farm by x10 the amount. You would end up farming for months on end for MANY, MANY GAMES unless you bought their XP Boosters.
Oh and guess what? You might as well throw your money out the window when buying items from a cash shop, because the company can easily make newer and better items, and you just wasted $50 on that sword of darkness +1 when there is a sword of bigger darkness +10.
Not only that but cash shops kill immersion.
No one should be supporting cash shops and this is one of the reasons why MMOs suck balls nowadays. Instead of buying the full game, you have to pay for ingame items in order to stay competitive.
Supporters of F2P are fooling themselves and I bet most of them already have blown $400+ on stupid ingame items, its a damn shame and ruins the spirit of gaming.
Take it to /tells for God's Sake.
Nah i am done replying. He can have the last word. Not in mood to be trolled further.
When people resort to personal attacks you know it is time to walk away.
Umm that is one full complete sentence ..let me repost it for you..'You did claim that F2P is most profitable business model because players here on these forums say so to which i simply replied saying that the market trend proves it regardless of what posters say on forums. '
Learn to read a sentence please. 'Because' exists for a reason..so much for literacy being an amazing thing....
"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
People are seeing and realizing f2p is nothing more then "subsidized" gaming and gamers thank god are now starting to make real decisions regarding that. Such as, do they support paying for another's gaming habits, do they get anything in return for supporting the person to their left and right?
Few, if any, people would subsidize another's gaming habits with little to no reward for themself.
Discuss. Reason. Society.
Become a Dragon. Take your world back.
There is nothing wrong with what you said. I agree 100%. You just have good taste that's all.
Not only kills them, slows innovation.
F2P is a cash grab. It's about sheer profits. We have many 2nd tier MMOs now, because it's cheap to throw some concepts together that's been tried out in WoW, and rehash them in another game. Just add PvP to it, and don't even need to add even new art assets, the players are the content.
Just look at all the PvP games. See any PvE game on the list that wasn't made prior to 2008, that's prime focus IS PvE?
Without that PvE innovation stalls. There's but a few games left that focuses on it. Folks chased that pewpewpew rabbit, and what we have to show for it is weaker and weaker MMOs, as PvP isn't designed to innovate, it's cheap programming filler.
.:| Kevyne@Shandris - Armory |:. - When WoW was #1 - .:| I AM A HOLY PALADIN - Guild Theme |:.
Who says anything about supporting F2P?
I just play for free. If i am not paying, there is no "support", right?
Now, i would love to see how you are going to stop the whales.
Now of course I barely crack 6 figures so not a "whale" in the least...but the only f2p I support is clear cut p2w.
Discuss. Reason. Society.
Become a Dragon. Take your world back.
Ty sir. Yes I made this post originally to mock the claim that because there are a plethora of F2P games generating income vs the few P2P that are successful...that somehow F2P is the better business model and that this is the way of the future. That is just a false claim. There have been F2P crap games available as long as I can remember...I believe I had Aika on my computer at the same time as WoW and FF XI. Games go F2P because it is the better business model for an mmo that wasn't successful enough to merit paying every month to play.
Games aren't releasing as F2P because it is the best business model for a SUCCESSFUL game...they are F2P because they have to get whatever money they can out of their crap product. There is no scenario in which a P2P game with respectable subscription numbers is less profitable than F2P. P2P games will always be released and the successful ones will flourish because of that business model. It is a better player base, better game service, better all around. People will gladly go P2P for an exceptional game. The problem has been since 2004, there are a serious lack of games worth subbing to...not the business model itself.
And to those that say..."Oh you fools, paying all those fees to play a game. I'm going to play when it's free in 6 months...bahaha" If the game wasnt worth you purchasing or paying a fee to play in the first place...wtf are you playing it for 6 months later? Get a life. Show some couth, and quit moving through life with your hand out. When a business provides you with a service that benefits you.....YOU SHOULD COMPENSATE THEM. smh
Not when a business practically begging me to play for free.
It is a free world. Devs don't need to offer anything for free. At the same time, if they do, there is little reason not to take it.
So what if a game is worth a sub. If they are offered to me for free, it is even better ... i am playing a sub-worthy game for free.
And if it is not fun for me, i won't touch it.
I pay for SP games. I pay for michelin star restaruants. I pay for private schools for my kids. But MMOs? Why should i pay a dime when i get the same amount of fun for free? Heck, i get MORE fun in f2p games. I like Star Trek, tell me a p2p alternative of STO? There is none.
Here. Just one article of many articles over the years which have detailed F2P's successes.
It's great to be skeptical and demand proof, but remember you have the internet and can find this stuff pretty easily yourself too.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Of the 3 Titles you mentioned only one will never go to F2P regardless of profitability.
FF11 has ran for over 10 years on a sub based model, and FF14 will also run on a sub model for the duration of it's service. I do not see Square/Enix ever moving away from this model regardless of profits ever. FF14 is a P2P game for life, everyone will just have to deal with it.
Wildstar, NCSoft has a habit of attempting to go the P2P route only to cave in after a while and toss it's games up to the cash shop crowd as was the case with Aion in 2.0. Wildstar however might be good enough to stay P2P for quite some time, but it will eventually go to the cash shop model.
ESO, who knows Bethesda is a good game company, they make quality stuff. Can ESO stand up to all the games releasing like EQNext, Wildstar, FFXIV and keep itself in a P2P slot, I guess only time will tell. I hope it does, ESO has potential but I think as a cash shop title it won't be as good as it could be.
I think STO is one of the best examples a person to give to show how F2P changes the kinds of activities developers create for players. Maybe your happy with things like multiple game currencies designed for the sole purpose of inserting real world money into the game economy and grind activities designed to make life as a free player in the game as difficult as possible and if so more power to you but I don't know how someone who says they understand the value of things like private school vs public school or a good meal vs fast food would not understand that some of us don't and would rather play a game where the developers focus is on keeping us happy and playing the game long term (subbing) rather than trying to see how many cash shop sales they can drum up that month? I'm willing to pay a sub for such a game as I get value out of it, if you get just as much value out of F2P games than that's great, there are plenty of those types of games on the market and more to come for sure. I don't think asking for a handful of decent P2P games is to much.
Oh .. i understand why you prefer p2p. I just don't share that preference.
STO ... currency don't concern me. i got my your free star ship, and free officers. And i am playing through the story mission solo. There is no grind. Each mission is going to be done only once. The game is easy enough that i don't need any paid advantage.
And i expect i will "finish" the game eventually. So that is pure free fun for me.
Take Marvel Heroes as another example. I already finished the story content with one hero. That is 30 hours of free fun for me. I don't see a reason why i should not enjoy it when i find beating up The Hand ninjas with daredevil fun.
Now i never say you should not ask for p2p games to play. It is your preferences, not mine. But it is fair to point out that the market is going the opposite direction (and we can debate that). And it is also fair game to state that don't expect me to play/support that handful of p2p MMOs.
I have a feeling FFXIV will have no problems being P2P. The website can't even keep up with demand for early access codes
I don't really like F2P games, they seem to always end up putting more time into a helmet or mount or something that I don't want or need, instead of creating new content, which I really need.
Is a game truly sub-worthy if it had to convert to being F2P to generate income? Again, I stress this...the problem isn't with the payment methods, and that there are no longer enough people willing to pay a monthly fee. The problem is that there hasn't been a game since 2004 worth paying for in the long run. No one has duplicated WoW's success. MANY have tried. But because many have failed, that does not mean that someday there won't be another game to have that kind of staying power using a P2P revenue model.
There are many reasons to not take games for free. Provide revenue to the game maker, so as to pay their employees and generate new meaningful content are two that come to mind.
I get it though, you have found a F2P game that you can get everything you want out of entertainment wise...for free. I have no problem with you finding your entertainment that way. The problem I and many others have is that we do not get the same level of entertainment from the F2P market. It is also a market that has the capacity for shady business....overpriced fluff, P2W, pay to progress. That is not the future of exceptional games...just the mass produced asian grinds and titles that weren't up to snuff to remain P2P. If it IS the future...God help us all.....
There probably is some mathematical, logical formula based on the development cost and cost of maintaining the game which shows the level of subs needed for a game to make more profit than would be generated for a f2p. I actually don't think it would be that difficult to figure out provided you had access to the aforementioned data across several dozen games.
That being said, why wouldn't a game launch as p2p? These days getting 2 million players in a month is pretty common, that is 2 million people all buying the game, an enormous amount of cash that pretty much covers all development. In 6 months to a year when there is 50-500k subs (like almost every other game on the market, a much more realistic level of subs, based on all the other games and the time they have been out), would it still be more profitable as a sub?
Face it. This is the new business model. P2p on launch to reap income from initial launch sales which are astronomically huge, and f2p with cs, or p2p with cs down the road to maintain the income.
In an age where games cost 50-100 million+ to develop (vs 10 million of yesteryear), and still most games have between 50-500k subs, it is highly unlikley that subs alone are capable of maintaining the profit demanded to maintain the game. Not impossible just unlikely. Therefore they either need to lower the development cost or find a way to generate more income. So far they found a way to generate more income.
To expect that a game, any game will maintain greater than 500,000 subs when so few games have ever even made it that far, is just not realistic. The companies now know this as well.