No free to play option?

LedrirLedrir Orlando, FLMember UncommonPosts: 67
I have heard that there is no free to play option and I am a little concerned about this.  I realize that some people see this as a cover charge that keeps out the trouble makers.  Maybe that is true, however I wonder how many people will pay $15 without some way of trying the game out to see if they like it.

What if the free to play players were used in a way that strengthens the game?  I do not know what the max player limit for a server is but lets say its a little over 3000.  However, during some parts of the day the server will have less than 2000 players on it?  CSE could allow free to play players to log in to any server that has less than 2000 currently playing on it.  If the population goes over 2000 then no new free to play players can log on.  If the server goes over 2500 then the game forces free to players on over 3 hours to log out.

This would help in two ways.  It would give people a chance to try the game out for free to see if they like it.  It would also help to prop up populations on any server that is currently below its desired player size.


«1345678

Comments

  • AngryElfAngryElf Member UncommonPosts: 122
    Helps deter gold spammers, unless of course they're using stolen CC#s.  Should still keep the RMTs lower than typical F2P. 
  • Nayr752Nayr752 Mesa AZMember UncommonPosts: 172
    I agree. It would allow people to try out the game.
  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko JohannesburgMember EpicPosts: 6,540
    That solution is completely impractical.

    There's no way that a paying player will accept being unable to play because F2P players have filled the server during off-peak hours.

    There's no way a F2P player is going to accept being summarily kicked if the server has filled and a new paying player is trying to join.
  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAMember LegendaryPosts: 22,870
    Ledrir said:
    I have heard that there is no free to play option and I am a little concerned about this.  I realize that some people see this as a cover charge that keeps out the trouble makers.  Maybe that is true, however I wonder how many people will pay $15 without some way of trying the game out to see if they like it.

    What if the free to play players were used in a way that strengthens the game?  I do not know what the max player limit for a server is but lets say its a little over 3000.  However, during some parts of the day the server will have less than 2000 players on it?  CSE could allow free to play players to log in to any server that has less than 2000 currently playing on it.  If the population goes over 2000 then no new free to play players can log on.  If the server goes over 2500 then the game forces free to players on over 3 hours to log out.

    This would help in two ways.  It would give people a chance to try the game out for free to see if they like it.  It would also help to prop up populations on any server that is currently below its desired player size.


    I don't really think it's about it being a cover charge but more about the idea that games cost money and it's easier for them to work within a budget if they have a good idea what their monthly income will be over the uncertainty of a cash shop.

    Additionally, if they have a cash shop they have to continually develop things for this cash shop to keep people paying.

    Maybe they think that their player base would rather pay for game play than shop items.



  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,600
    There are few games with cash shops I am ok with how the cash shop is handled. Its like GW2 and BD cash shops. Both sell items you dont need but between the two, I dont mind GW2 cash shop but BD cash shop makes me not want to play the game. If I had to pick, I would rather a small sub fee over a cash shop. I do think there should be an option to try the game for free, even if its just for a few level. To much crap out there now days and I just wont buy a game unless I get to try it first. Unless... the game is getting stellar reviews for players. So all the power to CU, keep on going with the payment model you have and let me try it for free for a day or two?



  • LedrirLedrir Orlando, FLMember UncommonPosts: 67
    I intend to give the game a try even if there is not a free to play option to try it out.  But I played DAoC and feel like CU has a chance to be a fun game.  I am just worried that CU may limit the influx of new players if there is not at least a free to try option to the game.  I think some games have two week trial periods when you create a new account.  So I wouldn't be surprised if that is the path CU takes as well.

    I just thought a game could actually use free to play players to keep the server numbers up.  The free to play players would still have a reason to subscribe since they would be booted to make room for paying players if during primetime the server got too full.


  • SiphaedSiphaed Everywhere!Member UncommonPosts: 1,036
    There was a time in WoW's early days that it had no "free trial" at all.  Instead it had paid trial CDs sold at Gamestops, Walmarts, and other retailers.  It was a $1.99 14-Day Trial Edition, which limited players to certain levels, couldn't use the auction house, and other things that limited them too.  ....And yet, the game grew.  

    Word of mouth sells.  Period.  A bad game sells badly, while a good game sells goodly.   MJ and crew have said that they're not chasing WoW numbers, F2P numbers, or any type of larger population for the game. 

    They're never going to have a cash shop.  Period.  This is repeated nearly every stream that they've done as well as in some of the newsletters.   Without a cash shop, they're not going to set up a F2P option because frankly it'll not benefit them with extra server stress/load without any revenue.  

    The business model is subscription.  The game's digital/box version costs money to purchase before even being able to subscribe.  There is even currently a $190 'Lifetime Sub' option in their backer section for dedicates that comes to covering 12.66 months at $15 each, then basically free after that for years (it is $1 a year after the first 3 years due to a legal set up with their original Kickstarter campaign).  

    Expect the game to shutdown before it ever goes "Free 2 Play".


  • MoiraeMoirae New Orleans, LAMember RarePosts: 3,219
    Why concerned? F2p is part of what is wrong with the gaming world now. There have been whole articles on how it, and theme park MMO"s, have started the downfall of the genre. 
  • VutarVutar S. KoreaMember UncommonPosts: 876
    If they added a F2P option there would be a revolt. This game was sold on being old school and it was clearly stated that it would be a subscription game, not F2P.
  • Cramit845Cramit845 Port Ewen, NYMember UncommonPosts: 394
    I think your idea is interesting but kinda doubt they will go that route.  I like the sub model, just not sure if the price is worth the $15 a month.  I think sub based games really need to consider their prices.  I would think they would realize that $15 a month is considered a "premium" in terms of sub's and that maybe dropping it to like $10 or something around there would be a bit more beneficial, since the barrier for entry would be a bit less.  Then again, $5 isn't that much but I think a lower sub would do better to allow more folks in to try the game instead of the system suggested above.
  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEMember RarePosts: 3,285
    F2P = scam you for more money than a monthly sub.


  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEMember RarePosts: 3,285

    Moirae said:
    Why concerned? F2p is part of what is wrong with the gaming world now. There have been whole articles on how it, and theme park MMO"s, have started the downfall of the genre. 
    even though i agree with your F2P view, other non sandbox type games are not doing the genre any better. it's all been done before just with a twist, that's the problem.
  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEMember RarePosts: 3,285

    Ledrir said:
    I intend to give the game a try even if there is not a free to play option to try it out.  But I played DAoC and feel like CU has a chance to be a fun game.  I am just worried that CU may limit the influx of new players if there is not at least a free to try option to the game.  I think some games have two week trial periods when you create a new account.  So I wouldn't be surprised if that is the path CU takes as well.

    I just thought a game could actually use free to play players to keep the server numbers up.  The free to play players would still have a reason to subscribe since they would be booted to make room for paying players if during primetime the server got too full.


    i am okay with free trials, the guest passes are good for that as well. making a game F2P means they have to make money some other way, which always includes spending loads of money in the cash shop to get stuff that should just come with the game.

    unless you are okay with being a second rate citizen or spend a lot more money than you normally would on a simple sub, F2P is an absolute cancer to mmo's IMO
  • LedrirLedrir Orlando, FLMember UncommonPosts: 67
    After reading the responses and thinking about how full servers are when a game first releases, I'm guessing CU will probably have a business model similar to DAoC which is probably the best way to go. 

    Since there is usually a huge surge of players when a game releases there will be no need to have a free trial early on.  Once the initial rush of players into a new game subsides and the servers are not packed then it would probably make sense to have a free trial option for players who might want to check the game out before spending money.
  • collektcollekt Member UncommonPosts: 318
    edited March 2016
    Free to Play is a cancer, please do not try to force that upon CU (not that they'd ever let it happen anyway). The sub model encourages developers to stay true to the game, and encourages them to provide regular updates and support the game for a long time to come. F2P encourages developers to design the game around ways to extract money from whales, as opposed to designing a solid, fun game.

    To people who complain about the cost of a sub: Where is the logic? Even if the sub price is $15 a month, that's such an incredibly low amount of money for the number of hours of entertainment you can get out of an MMO. That's the part that I can never understand, how people complain about having to pay it. For the same price, you can go to a 1.5 hour movie or get fast food for a couple of people. Compare that to the number of hours the average MMO player spends in their game of choice over the course of the month. $15 is nothing. If you can't afford $15/month you shouldn't be spending your money on games in the first place.
    Post edited by collekt on
  • TheutusTheutus Destin, FLMember UncommonPosts: 636
    I vote no free to play. Please keep the cash shop cancer away. 
  • Agent_JosephAgent_Joseph Member UncommonPosts: 1,253
    edited March 2016
    if cant pay monthly for playing game , peoples should find job not spend time for  gaming 
    Post edited by Agent_Joseph on

    only EVE is real MMO...but I am impressive with TSW

  • tinuelletinuelle bergenMember UncommonPosts: 361
    I'd only be concerned about it not beeing F2P if you aint got money to pay for the game and sub. 
    There aint a lot of promising MMO's on their way, so CU will prolly have their share of players at release. Going F2P is only an alternative for this game I guess when its in its death wails and MJ decides to piss of his crowdfunders. Anyways not gonna happen before his paying players asks for it, and they wont unless a few years down the road after launch they want a bunch more players and spambots.

    image
  • GrumpyHobbitGrumpyHobbit londonMember RarePosts: 1,220
    Being subscription based is one of the reasons I will probably give this game a go. 
  • meddyckmeddyck USAMember UncommonPosts: 1,217
    MJ has pretty strong feelings against F2P and has made it clear the game will have a sub fee at launch. He has however said it might be less than the usual $14.95/month. The exact costs for the sub options will likely be announced shortly before launch.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • HatefullHatefull Member RarePosts: 1,464
    Being subscription based is one of the reasons I will probably give this game a go. 
    I have other reasons, but this right here is what caught my eye and made me start paying attention to this game.  Since I started reading about CU I have developed a lot stronger desire to play the game, but the subscription model is what got me first.  Sad but true.

    The freeloader games...ugh I have just had enough of them, the endless spam, the morons taking over region chat, it's just too much.  I know there will always be some of that but in a subscription game the stakes are a bit higher.  Also, lets face it old school communities had a very low tolerance for this type of behavior and in a game where team work and being able to get a group is very important, being black-balled by a majority of the community can have a very detrimental affect on trollish behavior.

    So bring on the subscription! 

    If you want a new idea, go read an old book.

  • LuidenLuiden Member UncommonPosts: 98
    I hope they don't spend a single second even thinking about this, not one resource, not one penny.  The F2P concept has held MMORPG gaming hostage for well over a decade now and it's time to kill it.  I'd gladly pay 50 dollars a month just to keep all the bad that comes with F2P out of the game.  

    15 years ago we were paying something like 10 to 15 dollars per month to play these games.. that price has for the most part has not adjusted with inflation at all and in my opinion needs to be raised to help fund the quality games that we are looking for and keep them away from the poison that is F2P and cash shops.

    Look at what happened to EQ2, instead of raising the monthly subscription to support quality expansions they spent their resources on moving it to F2P and look at the game now.. total shit.  The expansions have been terrible and are no where even close to the quality of the expansions of old.  

    The F2P/cash shop model is really, really, really bad for gaming.  It's short term gains for the developer (which is why they do it) while sacrificing the long term viability of the game.  I will not invest my time in any game that follows this model.. which is why I'm excited about Unchained.
  • Octagon7711Octagon7711 Chicago, ILMember EpicPosts: 5,712
    So pay the sub for one month.  That's 30 days to try the game, if you don't like it cancel.  That's what people used to do before f2p came along.

    "Change is the only constant."

  • collektcollekt Member UncommonPosts: 318
    edited March 2016
    So pay the sub for one month.  That's 30 days to try the game, if you don't like it cancel.  That's what people used to do before f2p came along.
    But OMG $15 is so much, we can't possibly be asked to spare the price of one meal to play a game for an entire month. I can drop like $8 for a drink at a movie theater or pay a monthly sub for Netflix though, no problem. /sarcasm

    I hate the F2P crowd so much.
    Post edited by collekt on
  • TabmoweTabmowe avon, COMember UncommonPosts: 33
    collekt said:
    So pay the sub for one month.  That's 30 days to try the game, if you don't like it cancel.  That's what people used to do before f2p came along.
    But OMG $15 is so much, we can't possibly be asked to spare the price of one meal to play a game for an entire month. I can drop like $8 for a drink at a movie theater or pay a monthly sub for Netflix though, no problem. /sarcasm

    I hate the F2P crowd so much.
    Worst thing that ever happened to gaming.
Sign In or Register to comment.