Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

New data settles it, F2P makes much more money than P2P

18911131421

Comments

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by aesperus
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer

    1. How you think getting a free teaser sampling is better than the full meal is beyond me.

    What teaser sampling? I finish Marvel Heroes (all the story content) without paying a dime. Sure, it is only for the free hero. But don't you think it s pretty good value to get a free full meal, even when you cannot choose whether to get set menu A or B?

    Are you done with Marvel now?

    Even if you aren't it's only one game. Your overall aproach to F2P gaming required you to hop from game to game. 

    This is the teaser. You call it a value but for almost everyone else out there, it fails to address the dealbreaker. The issue that would cause the majority of people in this genre to quit.

    Players don't choose the MMO genre to frequently start over.

    And yet people are frequently game hopping MMOs, regardless of their business model. WAR, AoC, Secret World, Age of Wushu, GW2, FFXIV, DCUO, Defiance; the list goes on and on and on. All (but WAR) still have people playing, all have had mass amounts of players migrate to other games. Many (but not all) of those are, or were, subscription models.

    Furthermore, you also have games like League of Legends, & WoW which have had long term fans for many years.

    This data, while it may seem like 'news' to these forums, has been known by developers & publishers for years now. After companies like Turbine tried F2P, many companies have experimented & gathered data on the F2P model. It's long been proven to generate more revenue.

    One of the main reasons MMOs still charge subs, is because they can double dip. Too many MMO gamers seem to think that having a subscription guaruntees quality. Even though it's completely unsubstantiated by actual data. So companies will continue to launch w/ subs, because it's less risky than F2P. They are guarunteed money back upfront, and can then switch to a F2P later to keep the game going.

    - Many people like to point to WoW as an example for P2P, but it's a poor example. WoW is an outlier, with many outside factors which contributed to its success. Factors which cannot be recreated by others within the current market.

    When I made the statement I made, I did, indeed think about it before I posted it. I realize it's generally not a good Idea to make sweeping claims like that, but as I said, I did think about it. And I will stand by it.

    I still believe that we are talking about a pillar in the foundation of what makes an MMORPG. I am not talking about players sticking to only one MMORPG since I also am playing more than one.  But I am saying that in it's fundamental design, the idea of continuously abandoning one character/game for another in some kind of rapid succession runs against what makes an MMORPG an MMORPG.

    I am going to pose a question here too. For those players who "game hop" what do you think the ratio of players are who are game hopping because they are looking for, but cant find the right MMORPG to suit their needs, vs. the mentality similar to this thread's OP?

    Also, you have included titles that are not MMORPGs. Players active in both LoL and WoW (Or any other MMO) is not what I am discussing.

    Still, I suppose I probably should have worded my earlier response to the OP more along the lines of the question I just asked in this post. It might have come across better that way.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    Originally posted by cheyane

    I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.

     

    This used to be the only way to play.  You clicked and waited or you ground out those mobs to get what you wanted.  Maybe F2P is just "Old School" under a new name. :-)

     

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

  • Fractal_AnalogyFractal_Analogy Cyberspace, ILPosts: 170Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by xeniar

    how nice we are comparing apples with oranges and trowing some bananas in the mix.

    This still means absolutely nothin becaus the apples have games with subs and the other category's do not.

    total bullshit comparison.

    Games are games. It is not like people who are playing MMORPGs would not play FPS, or MOBA.

    And yes, comparing apples to oranges is appropriate when i need to decide what fruit to eat tonight.

     

     

    Let me get this strait:

    SO, are you now claiming, that your repetitive argument is indeed a farce..? Literally, back-up by nothing other than your own playstyle..?

     

    You have essentially stated, that you have trolled everyone in this thread and foolishly wasted our time..? (Yes..  you have opinions...  that are not facts.)

  • cheyanecheyane Rome Posts: 3,002Member Uncommon

    I played EQ from 1999 so I have played older games of this genre and know how they were played but Neverwinter does not have the cache EQ had therefore the grind is very jarring for me and the fact that I have to spend the real cash for something so basic as level 20 armourcraft has my teeth on edge and honestly EQ was never about the grind but the people you chatted with while you waited for the spawn . You do not do that in Neverwinter try running a daily Dungeon Delve in it and you will understand.

    Comparing a grind in EQ and Neverwinter without the surrounding elements is not a fair comparison. I would sit for days in a room camping a mob for EQ but I will never grind that for Neverwinter. Why ? No idea.

    I even ground out mobs in EQ 2 for lore weapons but I am loath to do it in Neverwinter may be because the game fails to invoke the same type of commitment in me that the other games managed.

    image

    Uploaded with ImageShack.us

  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,930Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by cheyane

    I shudder to play the way the OP plays after reading his proud claims of having played so many games as F2P. No disrespect mind you must say this in fact I take my hat off at your tenacity and ability to stomach the horrible restrictions of grinds required to play only F2P. It makes me sick to the stomach when I discovered I needed to make 64 of a level one crafter in Neverwinter at 18 hours each summon to make another tier. I wept when I saw what I would have to grind to get some good gear. I am one of those who treasure my free time between books and my Korean dramas the games I play I cannot afford to really milk the F2P like the OP does. I might go slightly mad if I did so I sub if I can or pay a bit for unlocks if there are no sub options. Yes I am the weak whale so shoot me for valuing my time above all else. OP more power to you.

     

    This used to be the only way to play.  You clicked and waited or you ground out those mobs to get what you wanted.  Maybe F2P is just "Old School" under a new name. :-)

     

    You know, you do have a point there. So many of the old school mmos had tremendous grinds, the F2P market brings that back in a way. Of course, the problem with the F2P market is that many of the games place artificial restrictions to try to get you to spend some cash. Having restrictions on hotbar slots/bars, currency caps, chat restrictions, etc. leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Now if a game was F2P and I could get to level cap and grind things out at a reasonable rate, but then I'd have to purchase DLC packs every so often for new dungeons, new armor skins, new types of mounts, new classes, etc., I'd have a much easier time playing many of the F2P games, and I might even support them with purchases.

    GW2 and the B2P works pretty well with the exception of hiding many of the weapon skins in Black Lion's Chests and the keys are so rare that you're basically forced into purchasing keys to open them. I would actually have more respect for the system if they just sold the skins in the gem store, as opposed to making it a pure gamble with the chests.

  • GravargGravarg Harker Heights, TXPosts: 3,332Member Uncommon
    From a player stand point, why should I even care about which makes more money.  I want the one that makes more content and is more fun.  Which is 95% leaning towards subscriptions.  F2P games have the majority of their resources put into making mounts, pets, and items for their cash shop, not new, buyable expansions and such like subscription games do.  Look at F2P games versus P2P, which one has more expansions?  There are some F2P games that have been out for 5+ years that have never done an expansion, and only a few content updates....No thanks.  I would rather pay less, and get more if you ask me :)
  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Kaneth
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by cheyane

     

    ...............GW2 and the B2P works pretty well with the exception of hiding many of the weapon skins in Black Lion's Chests and the keys are so rare that you're basically forced into purchasing keys to open them. I would actually have more respect for the system if they just sold the skins in the gem store, as opposed to making it a pure gamble with the chests.

    It's only my opinion (with no real data to back it up) but I think the B2P business model isn't as successful as what we are lead to believe. Before Wildstar announced their business model, I was willing to bet my lunch money on the fact it would be a B2P model. But it's not. ESO is launching with a Sub and FF14 is still holding on to a successful subscription base.

  • funyahnsfunyahns michigan city, INPosts: 315Member
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.
  • CazNeergCazNeerg Puyallup, WAPosts: 2,198Member
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    You don't have to be happy about the reality that something is true in order to be happy that the data says you were correct when you argued that it was true.  Too many people on this forum argue that something is true just because they want it to be true, rather than because the facts indicate it actually is.

    Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
    Through passion, I gain strength.
    Through strength, I gain power.
    Through power, I gain victory.
    Through victory, my chains are broken.
    The Force shall free me.

  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

  • funyahnsfunyahns michigan city, INPosts: 315Member
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

     You should care about dev motivation though.  That is going to be a key thing going forward for what is actually going to be put into each individual game.   Even if F2P makes more money, that is not necessarily a good thing for us as consumers. I think the most important thing for all gamers is to have fun, why would your motivation be different than mine?   I don't play a game for any other reason than to have fun.  Sure there may some variation here and there on what  would be construed as being fun.  I know that if companies are putting little things in to try and nickel and dime me in game it will subtract from the experience. 

     I am curious about some of the numbers from say SwToR though.  Like what is the big money makers for them.  I know little about the actual Cartel market, but I have heard that there are some gambling boxes for items.  I am curious if that is there big money maker.  Using that nasty part of human nature to get people to click spend.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

     

    You guys are putting way too much importance on one person's spending habits.  It is true that many people do play for free, but it's also true that many people are paying money as well.  If people playing for free was getting progressively worse for developers, rather than making them more money year over year, they wouldn't be doing it.  Investors wouldn't invest in F2P games and indie studios wouldn't even consider a F2P aspect to their game. 

     

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

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

     

    You guys are putting way too much importance on one person's spending habits.  It is true that many people do play for free, but it's also true that many people are paying money as well.  If people playing for free was getting progressively worse for developers, rather than making them more money year over year, they wouldn't be doing it.  Investors wouldn't invest in F2P games and indie studios wouldn't even consider a F2P aspect to their game. 

     

    But isn't this what we are starting to see?

    Wasn't Turbine one of the initiators of this F2P trend showing how they turned around games like LOTRO and DDO and increased their profits? And everyone took notice?

    Aren't those games in trouble now? (At least there is a recent thread on LOTRO being  in trouble. Don't know how valid it is)

    It's not just one person's spending habbits. If it was, Nariusseldon's ideals would have been dismissed a long time ago and he'd have been written off as nothing more than a Forum Troll.

    But he has over 16000 posts. Either he is one of the greatest trolls in MMORPG history, or there is something to what he is saying.(Or maybe a combination of the 2)

    I think there is some cause for concern TBH.

     

    What other area in the entertainment industry do people expect to be entertained for free? Even TV requires you to watch commercials.

  • jpnzjpnz SydneyPosts: 3,529Member
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

    Ironically, you are in a thread that factually states, people like Nari are the minority.

    Gdemami -
    Informing people about your thoughts and impressions is not a review, it's a blog.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
     
  • nariusseldonnariusseldon santa clara, CAPosts: 22,441Member
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

    Who says i need an outlook to support "fun" over the long term. Today i play some MMOs because they are fun to me. I care less if it would last for a year, or 10. Entertainment changes anyway. I watch more tv (because of many good shows like The Blacklist, Arrow, GoT ...) in the last 2 years than before. Who can says what is the best entertainment for me in the long term.

    And devs need to reach an equilibrium with the market. If they don't provide something that is fun to their audience, they don't have a business. Now they don't necessarily cater to me, since i am only one free player. When they stop doing that, i am moving on to other entertainment.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer ChairPosts: 5,590Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

    Who says i need an outlook to support "fun" over the long term. Today i play some MMOs because they are fun to me. I care less if it would last for a year, or 10. Entertainment changes anyway. I watch more tv (because of many good shows like The Blacklist, Arrow, GoT ...) in the last 2 years than before. Who can says what is the best entertainment for me in the long term.

    And devs need to reach an equilibrium with the market. If they don't provide something that is fun to their audience, they don't have a business. Now they don't necessarily cater to me, since i am only one free player. When they stop doing that, i am moving on to other entertainment.

    Well,

    I guess at the end of it all, regardless of anyone's feelings, you aren't the one who put these games out there for "free" so I have to ultimately live with my own opinion no matter what it is, since you aren't doing anything other than what they (Publishers) are telling you to do. All I can do is bow out and say....

    "Have fun"

     

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by lizardbones
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

     

    You guys are putting way too much importance on one person's spending habits.  It is true that many people do play for free, but it's also true that many people are paying money as well.  If people playing for free was getting progressively worse for developers, rather than making them more money year over year, they wouldn't be doing it.  Investors wouldn't invest in F2P games and indie studios wouldn't even consider a F2P aspect to their game. 

     

    But isn't this what we are starting to see?

    Wasn't Turbine one of the initiators of this F2P trend showing how they turned around games like LOTRO and DDO and increased their profits? And everyone took notice?

    Aren't those games in trouble now? (At least there is a recent thread on LOTRO being  in trouble. Don't know how valid it is)

    It's not just one person's spending habbits. If it was, Nariusseldon's ideals would have been dismissed a long time ago and he'd have been written off as nothing more than a Forum Troll.

    But he has over 16000 posts. Either he is one of the greatest trolls in MMORPG history, or there is something to what he is saying.(Or maybe a combination of the 2)

    I think there is some cause for concern TBH.

     

    What other area in the entertainment industry do people expect to be entertained for free? Even TV requires you to watch commercials.

     

    Until some actual information comes forward to show Turbine is hurting because of the performance of their games, I wouldn't assume it to be true.  I especially wouldn't consider a thread on their forums a valid source of information unless it was backed up with information that wasn't just one person's observations.

     

    But even assuming LotRO is in trouble (it's not), it is one game.  It would be amazing if one game in the multitude of games running wasn't in trouble.  That's not a cause for alarm, that's normal.  Every game can't be a top performer.  Some of them must fail.  Eventually they all must fail.  As long as new games are entering the market (there are), then things are working as they should.

     

    Besides, what we see from the information presented, gathered from many developers is that letting people play for free does lead to people spending money.  This is money that otherwise would not be collected.  The alternative would be to shut the games down because there's no third option.  Some sort of P2P model on the high end and then some sort of F2P model on the mid to low end.  Most of these games started with a P2P model, got all the money they could and now they are getting more money using some sort of F2P model. 

     

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

  • GaendricGaendric Posts: 449Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by GeezerGamer
    Originally posted by nariusseldon
    Originally posted by funyahns
     I would consider this all to be terrible news for gamers. I don't understand why some of you are so happy about this.  Game designers will see that the key to making money off of games is not in making a great experience.  It will be in putting in little financial obstacles, gambling and ease of use hurdles.  All of those things don't make for better gaming.  Candy Crush makes more money than everyone does that mean its a good game? No, it just feeds off of stupid human nature.  Applaud how f2p is so great while the whole market is stagnant.

    So? I only care if a game is fun, and would care less what is motivating the devs.

    If they put in too many things to make the game not fun, i am not playing it. So far, that has not happen to the specific games i am playing.

     

    This outlook will not support your idea of "fun" over the long term. If everyone felt as you do, this whole genre would have imploded in on itself years ago. And if you say, "Fine, I'll just find the next thing that comes along, then I have to question just how much of this truly is fun for you or if you are just bored

    Who says i need an outlook to support "fun" over the long term. Today i play some MMOs because they are fun to me. I care less if it would last for a year, or 10. Entertainment changes anyway. I watch more tv (because of many good shows like The Blacklist, Arrow, GoT ...) in the last 2 years than before. Who can says what is the best entertainment for me in the long term.

    And devs need to reach an equilibrium with the market. If they don't provide something that is fun to their audience, they don't have a business. Now they don't necessarily cater to me, since i am only one free player. When they stop doing that, i am moving on to other entertainment.

    Well,

    I guess at the end of it all, regardless of anyone's feelings, you aren't the one who put these games out there for "free" so I have to ultimately live with my own opinion no matter what it is, since you aren't doing anything other than what they (Publishers) are telling you to do. All I can do is bow out and say....

    "Have fun"

     

    That is true, but none the less, every free player needs to know and understand that his refusal to pay is lowering the quality of the games they enjoy.  

    The "free" option is there, and we can't blame anyone for using the offered option, I agree to that, but they should think about the consequences.

     

  • laokokolaokoko TaipeiPosts: 2,003Member

    I don't felt the game's quality is being lowered. 

    The main problem is the only reason those people can play for free is "someone else is paying the bill".

    So the people actually pay the bill, may need to pay much more than the 15$ a month.

  • GaendricGaendric Posts: 449Member Uncommon

    Those others would pay anyway. Thus the money from the free player is still missing overall. The point is that the overall market size (in terms of profit) shrinks. This leads to smaller future budgets and less polish/updates to current games than would be possible otherwise.

     

  • plutosamsplutosams Seattle, WAPosts: 49Member
    Wow, it amazes me how some people are incapable of reading charts before declaring proof of anything.  That chart clearly shows microtransactions sales.  It is easy to extrapolate that wow makes significantly more money than listed because that is only their microtransaction revenue, you still have to add all of their subscription revenue which is substantial.  It could very well place them at the top of the income chart, but we don't know since it isn't listed.  If you also read further in the chart you see that the F2P user count is dropping, while subscription is stable.  F2P requires massive amounts of extra players to account for those who choose to not pay, while everyone in subscription pays something.  If F2P user counts are dropping, that is a bad sign for the F2P market even if yearly income went up.  
  • Beatnik59Beatnik59 Chicago, ILPosts: 2,235Member Uncommon

    As Nassim Taleb would say, "consider the graveyard."

    These only show the successes...but what about the failures?  For every one of these games making money hand over fist, how many have closed down or are about to close down?

    I have no doubt cash stores (and this is really about cash stores, as we even admit that many of these games listed have a recurring subscription or tiered sub attached, as well as a cash store) can pay off big for a few games.  But this in itself doesn't show the viability of financing a game from ONLY the cash store, any more than a retired couple winning big at Vegas show the casino as a viable retirement funding strategy.

    __________________________
    "Its sad when people use religion to feel superior, its even worse to see people using a video game to do it."
    --Arcken

    "...when it comes to pimping EVE I have little restraints."
    --Hellmar, CEO of CCP.

    "It's like they took a gun, put it to their nugget sack and pulled the trigger over and over again, each time telling us how great it was that they were shooting themselves in the balls."
    --Exar_Kun on SWG's NGE

  • GaendricGaendric Posts: 449Member Uncommon

    Oh come on, don't ruin my planned retirement funding strategy now. Not fair! :)

     

Sign In or Register to comment.