F2P games in general [includes B2P] have more potential for money earning than P2P models. Actually i have even covered this topic in my master's thesis about mmo market hehe
There is a lot more money to be gain from F2P model than P2P model and over the years more games will shift to it and/or made from start with it in mind.
There are many many more reasons why F2P take over, definitly a lot more than in OP.
Totally wrong. If your teacher knows ANYTHING about the market, you prolly failed your master...
The strongest, richest MMO publishers/developers by a mile (Blizzard, EA, NCSoft) have only P2P games in their portfolio. No F2P publisher comes even a fraction close to their wealth. How can you explain or even justify this?
The only reason why the F2P model is considered viable business-wise is because in west Turbine pioneered the genre with 2 games on the verge of death, and they saw their income (reportedly) tenfolded.
it begs the question about how profitable is "tenfolding" an income that was driving you to bankruptcy...10 times 1k dollars is 10k dollars, if you owe 1m thats not gonna save you either. But anyway...
LotR and DDO benefited from the F2P shift because, hey, they were P2P quality games in a subgenre riddled with pure bullshit.
It was just natural that people flocked to play those (a welcome change from all the other insanely bad games), and If the cash shop was cleverly done the income would start flowing.
sometime soon the western F2P market will be at the exact same point as the P2P market, overcrowded, with far too many competence, andwith titles that are too similar and dont differenciate one from another.
I wonder how will the upcoming F2P titles do in that market...and what kind of tactics they will develop to prey on their players and make them part with their money. The more cuttthroating the market becomes, the worse the F2P titles will do, and the more they will have to milk their players in order to survive...
I think some people will see (to their surprise) that many F2P games put ever increasing draconian, even crippling restrictions on their free players to force them to "pay or the highway".
and even after shifting to F2P, many will still die due to low positive income....
F2P is not the be all end all money priting machine that f2p supporters say it is...
and in the mean time the good P2P games will still be earning the big bucks...
F2P is breathing down the neck of the standard sub MMO but they have a ways to go yet and some modifying to do before they will overtake the standard mmo market..
Currently it costs way more to play F2P games than it does to sub and the games are mostly grinders that are designed on fast moving addiction as opposed to content..
The time will come when F2P dominates and i just hope its some western devs that define the ultimate direction like arenanets B2P model which is truly gamer friendly and a totally substainable model..
These are my reasons and I think most F2P players (or B2P for Guild Wars) have similar reasons.
*Most P2P now have cashops also, so they are more expensive under all circumstances.
Novelty items most of the time, IF they even have cash shops. They aren't pay to win like just about every F2P game. You don't need to buy anything besides time for P2P, its just extras for fun. F2P has cash shop items that are vital to gameplay. This is how they pay for servers.
*I can play F2P for a week or less without having to pay for a whole month.
$14.99 for a month is a cheap cost for entertainment these days. Even if you don't play every day its still not worth complaining about. Heck, a movie and popcorn cost more then that.
*I can try out as many games as I like.
Free trials are pretty common anymore.
*I can convince my friends to try out these games.
Free trials give people a good understanding of game mechanics, and whether they will enjoy the game. Who levels more then a few levels to try a game? If you do that I call that playing, not trying. Some games even have buddy invites that offer more then free trials, and give you and your friends goodies.
*I don't have to worry about getting my CC card blocked.
Blocked? This has never been an issue for me. Pretty common to use a credit card to buy things online anymore.
*I spend less on average.
This is debatable. If you are fine with having half the gaming experience you may pay less then you would for a pay to play game. Although, a good majority of people will actually spend as much or more for F2P games cash shop items.
*The games have more players than most P2P games.
Quantity is in no way Quality when it comes to F2P games. They tend to have terrible communities from my experience. Successful P2P games will have communities that last years. Whereas F2P games have people who play for a week, and never play again. Though, their account is still counted as a player.
*F2P just sounds better!
It sounds like cheap lag fest with an overpriced cash shop with pay to win mechanics, and a bunch of immature people ruining the chat at all times. Though, I turn off general chat in most games a majority of the time.
I don't mind F2P games. LOTRO I think is doing a good job. With the way I play that game I think I could pay about the same or less than I would with a sub, but the nice thing is it's piecemeal. So if I can't play for 2 weeks I don't have to pay for it anyway.
What really chaps my hide are games like WoT where you pretty much have to sub AND purchase micro transactions. The funny thing is that game has even less content than most F2P games I've played. How anyone consideres it an MMO is beyond me.
F2P games in general [includes B2P] have more potential for money earning than P2P models. Actually i have even covered this topic in my master's thesis about mmo market hehe
There is a lot more money to be gain from F2P model than P2P model and over the years more games will shift to it and/or made from start with it in mind.
There are many many more reasons why F2P take over, definitly a lot more than in OP.
Totally wrong. If your teacher knows ANYTHING about the market, you prolly failed your master...
The strongest, richest MMO publishers/developers by a mile (Blizzard, EA, NCSoft) have only P2P games in their portfolio. No F2P publisher comes even a fraction close to their wealth. How can you explain or even justify this?
The only reason why the F2P model is considered viable business-wise is because in west Turbine pioneered the genre with 2 games on the verge of death, and they saw their income (reportedly) tenfolded.
it begs the question about how profitable is "tenfolding" an income that was driving you to bankruptcy...10 times 1k dollars is 10k dollars, if you owe 1m thats not gonna save you either. But anyway...
LotR and DDO benefited from the F2P shift because, hey, they were P2P quality games in a subgenre riddled with pure bullshit.
It was just natural that people flocked to play those (a welcome change from all the other insanely bad games), and If the cash shop was cleverly done the income would start flowing.
sometime soon the western F2P market will be at the exact same point as the P2P market, overcrowded, with far too many competence, andwith titles that are too similar and dont differenciate one from another.
I wonder how will the upcoming F2P titles do in that market...and what kind of tactics they will develop to prey on their players and make them part with their money. The more cuttthroating the market becomes, the worse the F2P titles will do, and the more they will have to milk their players in order to survive...
I think some people will see (to their surprise) that many F2P games put ever increasing draconian, even crippling restrictions on their free players to force them to "pay or the highway".
and even after shifting to F2P, many will still die due to low positive income....
F2P is not the be all end all money priting machine that f2p supporters say it is...
and in the mean time the good P2P games will still be earning the big bucks...
I ignored your post after first 3 words.
You completely have no idea about economics. I am actually IRL economist and i'll surprise you but WTF are you talking about ? TEACHER? I'm not high schoold student but got Masters degree in economics and actually wrote about mmo market master's thesis if you even know what that is. I've done researches etc so speak what you want but if you think P2P has higher income potential than F2P than you are delusional and have completely no idea about economics.
PS, i have discussed "model" not how certain games implemented it. This is not whether wow is cash cow or not but about the potential each of models have. As far as it goes it is possible to milk A LOT more cash out of F2P than P2P but the game needs to be good it can't be flop and the model must be implemented properly from the very start.
Learn to read.
GL in life with sucky economics.
PPS i even underlined the keyword for you.
EDIT: Hell, even ANet admitted F2P is better than P2P from financial point of view in one of their interviews.
EDIT2: Don't get shocked if Blizzard's new MMO will be B2P [variant of F2P]. I hope you'll remember my post then and pull your hair out
F2P had not "taken over" just old p2p titles that were/are dying changed to diffent business model.
League of Legens is the most played MMO and most watched MMO and most searched for MMO according to Xfire, Youtube and Google.
You might want to look a bit deeper into the why and the how of the LOL numbers process before they are proclaimed the god of all F2P games.
It is quite shifty to be sure.
"There is a certain undeniable power in the void; within lies an unspoken promise of greatness, the shadowy truth that man is ruled by fear not of what is seen, but of what he perceives is seen beyond."
Opinion, most people feel it is, it's on this site under MMO also and the makers also describe it as an MMO.
You're just being ridiculous. LoL is a MOBA. Nothing remotely close to an MMO. It has nothing to do with opinions, and everything with facts.
As for your OP,
-Most P2Ps do not have Cash Shops.
-You can play a P2P for a week, and even 2, without paying a monthly sub (Trial)
-You can try out most P2Ps too. Either in Beta or through Trials.
-You can convince your friends to play P2Ps too.
-Your credit card can be denied wether you pay for a P2P or buy items in a F2P. It makes no difference, and in the off-chance that your CC does get denied, you can always arrange this with your CC company. Not a big deal.
-Some players actually spend far more than $15 a month in F2Ps. Some do play entirely for free however.
-"The games have more players than most P2P games" I'd love to see your stats on this, because I don't believe it.
-F2P does sound better.
You'll need to come up with better reasons, yours are quite....bad. And before someone labels me as a hater, I'm actually a F2P supporter.
P2P are pay to win too, its only that not officially. RMT traders act as unofficial cash shops.
P2P offer an arbitrary incentive to pay once trial has finished (your N trial days are over, pay then!)
F2P offer an in-game incentive to pay ( player X dueled me and won... i need to enhance my equipment to defeat him)
I've had notice of people spending ridiculous amounts of cash in F2P games. Like enough cash to make a real world smithery shop smith for them that game items IRL.
As long as player advancement in MMORPGs is tedious, there will be pay-to-win services, official or not.
P2P are pay to win too, its only that not officially. RMT traders act as unofficial cash shops.
This is exactly what i fear a lot of people don't see or don't want to see.
You can pull the content card all you'd like but don't even try to pull the pay to win card because both models have been guilty of that for quite some time. People just don't want to admit it because it'll ruin their notion of the monthly fee somehow keeping them on equal footing with everyone else.
P2P are pay to win too, its only that not officially. RMT traders act as unofficial cash shops.
This is exactly what i fear a lot of people don't see or don't want to see.
You can pull the content card all you'd like but don't even try to pull the pay to win card because both models have been guilty of that for quite some time. People just don't want to admit it because it'll ruin their notion of the monthly fee somehow keeping them on equal footing with everyone else.
Its the exclusivity of cash shops that have some people who may of been excluded their whole lives feeling excluded again in a genre that used to be a refuge for people who might be excluded in real life cause of real life problems they can't control or were born with.
Paying someone else to farm gold for you is not the same as having cash shop exclusive items. All it does is merge the lines between our real life conditions and our virtual world persona. In short, they create a perception of exclusion, which is one of the reasons vanity items sell so well. People don't like feeling exluded.
"I swear -- by my life and my love for it -- that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine." - John Galt
Would you buy a game that turns out it be complete garbage or one that ends up closing down, or not paying next to nothing to try out a game?
And don't use that "free trail" excuse because only success stories have that option and it is simply false. It isn't FREE as your time is limited and you don't have access to most of the features.
What WoW is doing is quite clever; selling of some second rate game as completely free to play in the hope that they might subscribe to the real deal. Can't fool me!
F2P has taken over because of how saturated the market is with new players that weren't here seven years ago, and the sheer amount of MMOGs that exist now. It's the only two factors that are really relevant.
P2P are pay to win too, its only that not officially. RMT traders act as unofficial cash shops.
P2P offer an arbitrary incentive to pay once trial has finished (your N trial days are over, pay then!)
F2P offer an in-game incentive to pay ( player X dueled me and won... i need to enhance my equipment to defeat him)
I've had notice of people spending ridiculous amounts of cash in F2P games. Like enough cash to make a real world smithery shop smith for them that game items IRL.
As long as player advancement in MMORPGs is tedious, there will be pay-to-win services, official or not.
That's the main funding model for F2P games. Instead of everyone paying an equal amount like in P2P, in F2P, a small amount of people pay a disproportionate ammount while a large majority pay very little or nothing.
Many P2P only games have turned, after many successful years of P2P only, into a sort of unlimited free trial with paid for content. This leads some to say "omg all games are going f2p" those games are not F2P however. Such games include War,Lotro, D&D, Eq2, and more.
Then they see the fact that 10 f2p games a week are realeased. "OMG p2p is dead look at all the f2p games" Fact of the matter is, most of these games take advantage of the "its new" phenomina, trys to get you to spend some item mall money before realizing its all the same as last weeks release of 10 f2p games.
Then theres the common "game x no ones heard of has 32 billion players and its free so free games are more populair" overlooking the fact that one player can easily make 50 accounts and be counted as 50 players. Add to that anyone who passes by the game is counted as a player for life. You get the point.
Theres some sort of deep thirst among f2p only players, a thirst to make every game seem like it should go free, so that they can play all games without paying a dime, however quality games need investment money, they need a more accurate method of predicting how much money they will make to insure greater startup investment. Cash shop games lack this.
I think i saw examples in this thread of f2p's superiority being referenced to RoM, Allods, and LoL....youve got to be kidding me. RoM has what 2 servers that are barely full, for a f2p thats terrible. Reason is, its boring, its very cash shop dependant, if your not paying big bucks to dominate theres not a whole lot of reason to stick around either....Allods is a prime example of how a game with high hype, despite its clunky gameplay, can destroy itself via the cash shop, and LoL is a DOTA knockoff not even remotely a mmorpg...LoL is more a strategy game, since thats what its based off of. Even with that game, theres no way to tell how many people actually play and how many people, like me, signed up for two accounts and got bored of it after a week. Im sure i count for 2 of those million strong players or whatever.
Given the global recession, i would expect to see a whole lot more f2p games, which usually involve far less development and money to make, and far more canceld high budget AAA P2P games. Theres just more risk involved making them, more money needs to be rcouped, more investment is needed to make the appeal to the p2p crowd on top of needing quality content thats going to keep people subbed long term, rather than the get them in and get them in the CS quick modle preferd by the item mall games.
So call it a personal choice, but untill F2P games stop being a cash shop pissing contents as endgame, and starts developing a game that is by design meant to keep players entertained long term, ill stick with p2p. Theres a reason they dont need to release p2p games 5 a week like most of thes f2p design studios do...they keep their players longer, theres not a need to make a rehash every few months to keep the money flowing.
You completely have no idea about economics. I am actually IRL economist and i'll surprise you but WTF are you talking about ? TEACHER? I'm not high schoold student but got Masters degree in economics and actually wrote about mmo market master's thesis if you even know what that is. I've done researches etc so speak what you want but if you think P2P has higher income potential than F2P than you are delusional and have completely no idea about economics.
PS, i have discussed "model" not how certain games implemented it. This is not whether wow is cash cow or not but about the potential each of models have. As far as it goes it is possible to milk A LOT more cash out of F2P than P2P but the game needs to be good it can't be flop and the model must be implemented properly from the very start.
Learn to read.
GL in life with sucky economics.
PPS i even underlined the keyword for you.
EDIT: Hell, even ANet admitted F2P is better than P2P from financial point of view in one of their interviews.
EDIT2: Don't get shocked if Blizzard's new MMO will be B2P [variant of F2P]. I hope you'll remember my post then and pull your hair out
The reason why your argument and thesis was bogus is because you are cherry picking the companys. Of course games produced by quality studios might have a higher potential if they went the P2W route. However, if you look at most studios they don't have Guild Wars or WOW to sway consumers to try their new product.
For the love of god would people stop lumping B2P in with P2W. They don't even have anything in common with one another.
You completely have no idea about economics. I am actually IRL economist and i'll surprise you but WTF are you talking about ? TEACHER? I'm not high schoold student but got Masters degree in economics and actually wrote about mmo market master's thesis if you even know what that is. I've done researches etc so speak what you want but if you think P2P has higher income potential than F2P than you are delusional and have completely no idea about economics.
PS, i have discussed "model" not how certain games implemented it. This is not whether wow is cash cow or not but about the potential each of models have. As far as it goes it is possible to milk A LOT more cash out of F2P than P2P but the game needs to be good it can't be flop and the model must be implemented properly from the very start.
Learn to read.
GL in life with sucky economics.
PPS i even underlined the keyword for you.
EDIT: Hell, even ANet admitted F2P is better than P2P from financial point of view in one of their interviews.
EDIT2: Don't get shocked if Blizzard's new MMO will be B2P [variant of F2P]. I hope you'll remember my post then and pull your hair out
The reason why your argument and thesis was bogus is because you are cherry picking the companys. Of course games produced by quality studios might have a higher potential if they went the P2W route. However, if you look at most studios they don't have Guild Wars or WOW to sway consumers to try their new product.
For the love of god would people stop lumping B2P in with P2W. They don't even have anything in common with one another.
I would also like to point out the current real world economic downward spiral.....Mabey bragging about being an economist during a period of time where the current method of economisc is proving to be a failure, isnt the best way to prove your mmo related argument.. Like those scientists who thought the world was flat just as it was being discoved that it wasnt...
F2P had not "taken over" just old p2p titles that were/are dying changed to diffent business model.
League of Legens is the most played MMO and most watched MMO and most searched for MMO according to Xfire, Youtube and Google.
If it's so great how come I'm not playing it then? Better yet how come I'm not playing F2P games or MMOs I guess that would be low quality , and cash shops and P2W bs I don't need or want. EVE brought a CS into their game I gave my account away to someone else. Star Trek Online threw it in the trash. The business aspect that has plagued videogames with DLC and introductions of cash shops across all fronts is a simple clear cut case of greed and a testament that they don't have a clear confidence in their products so hey lets milk these sorry s.o.b.s for all their worth the ones that are suckered into buying these items or advantages. But thats just my opinion.
F2P had not "taken over" just old p2p titles that were/are dying changed to diffent business model.
League of Legens is the most played MMO and most watched MMO and most searched for MMO according to Xfire, Youtube and Google.
If it's so great how come I'm not playing it then? Better yet how come I'm not playing F2P games or MMOs I guess that would be low quality , and cash shops and P2W bs I don't need or want. EVE brought a CS into their game I gave my account away to someone else.
Perhaps not the most convincing "counter-argument". It's like saying "Well if pastas are so great, how come I'm not eating pastas?" ...because you don't have to, nor need to. It's a matter of personal taste. WoW is a great game, 11 million subs don't lie. I don't play WoW however, in fact, I really don't like this type of game. It doesn't mean that WoW is a bad game, just...not for me.
Perhaps the MMOs you play, I'll find them to be of "low quality", and perhaps the MMOs I play you'll also find them to be of "low quality". It's a ridiculous debate not worth having. As for the F2P being "P2W" or not, depends on the games. LoL for instance (since it was mentionned) has no P2W option.
With all that said, OP's post regarding "LoL" being the most played MMO wasn't worth replying to. LoL is a MOBA to begin with, which is not even remotely close to an MMO.
F2P had not "taken over" just old p2p titles that were/are dying changed to diffent business model.
League of Legens is the most played MMO and most watched MMO and most searched for MMO according to Xfire, Youtube and Google.
If it's so great how come I'm not playing it then? Better yet how come I'm not playing F2P games or MMOs I guess that would be low quality , and cash shops and P2W bs I don't need or want. EVE brought a CS into their game I gave my account away to someone else.
Perhaps not the most convincing "counter-argument". It's like saying "Well if pastas are so great, how come I'm not eating pastas?" ...because you don't have to, nor need to. It's a matter of personal taste. WoW is a great game, 11 million subs don't lie. I don't play WoW however, in fact, I really don't like this type of game. It doesn't mean that WoW is a bad game, just...not for me.
Perhaps the MMOs you play, I'll find them to be of "low quality", and perhaps the MMOs I play you'll also find them to be of "low quality". It's a ridiculous debate not worth having. As for the F2P being "P2W" or not, depends on the games. LoL for instance (since it was mentionned) has no P2W option.
With all that said, OP's post regarding "LoL" being the most played MMO wasn't worth replying to. LoL is a MOBA to begin with, which is not even remotely close to an MMO.
Ive played WoW for couple months and if i would write a review it would be rating it 5/10 becouse its crap, but its not my tast true.
Ive watch league of legens gameplay video i dont even try it out seems crap to me not my taste and not mmo ive in mind its just a rts game to me not an mmo.
Comments
F2p will have "taken over" when WoW is F2P. Until then, not so much.
Totally wrong. If your teacher knows ANYTHING about the market, you prolly failed your master...
The strongest, richest MMO publishers/developers by a mile (Blizzard, EA, NCSoft) have only P2P games in their portfolio. No F2P publisher comes even a fraction close to their wealth. How can you explain or even justify this?
The only reason why the F2P model is considered viable business-wise is because in west Turbine pioneered the genre with 2 games on the verge of death, and they saw their income (reportedly) tenfolded.
it begs the question about how profitable is "tenfolding" an income that was driving you to bankruptcy...10 times 1k dollars is 10k dollars, if you owe 1m thats not gonna save you either. But anyway...
LotR and DDO benefited from the F2P shift because, hey, they were P2P quality games in a subgenre riddled with pure bullshit.
It was just natural that people flocked to play those (a welcome change from all the other insanely bad games), and If the cash shop was cleverly done the income would start flowing.
sometime soon the western F2P market will be at the exact same point as the P2P market, overcrowded, with far too many competence, andwith titles that are too similar and dont differenciate one from another.
I wonder how will the upcoming F2P titles do in that market...and what kind of tactics they will develop to prey on their players and make them part with their money. The more cuttthroating the market becomes, the worse the F2P titles will do, and the more they will have to milk their players in order to survive...
I think some people will see (to their surprise) that many F2P games put ever increasing draconian, even crippling restrictions on their free players to force them to "pay or the highway".
and even after shifting to F2P, many will still die due to low positive income....
F2P is not the be all end all money priting machine that f2p supporters say it is...
and in the mean time the good P2P games will still be earning the big bucks...
F2P is breathing down the neck of the standard sub MMO but they have a ways to go yet and some modifying to do before they will overtake the standard mmo market..
Currently it costs way more to play F2P games than it does to sub and the games are mostly grinders that are designed on fast moving addiction as opposed to content..
The time will come when F2P dominates and i just hope its some western devs that define the ultimate direction like arenanets B2P model which is truly gamer friendly and a totally substainable model..
Playing GW2..
"cinnamon buns"
- Pickles
I don't mind F2P games. LOTRO I think is doing a good job. With the way I play that game I think I could pay about the same or less than I would with a sub, but the nice thing is it's piecemeal. So if I can't play for 2 weeks I don't have to pay for it anyway.
What really chaps my hide are games like WoT where you pretty much have to sub AND purchase micro transactions. The funny thing is that game has even less content than most F2P games I've played. How anyone consideres it an MMO is beyond me.
nethervoid - Est. '97
[UO|EQ|SB|SWG|PS|HZ|EVE|NWN|WoW|VG|DF|SWTOR|SotA|BDO]
24k subs YouTube Gaming channel
I ignored your post after first 3 words.
You completely have no idea about economics. I am actually IRL economist and i'll surprise you but WTF are you talking about ? TEACHER? I'm not high schoold student but got Masters degree in economics and actually wrote about mmo market master's thesis if you even know what that is. I've done researches etc so speak what you want but if you think P2P has higher income potential than F2P than you are delusional and have completely no idea about economics.
PS, i have discussed "model" not how certain games implemented it. This is not whether wow is cash cow or not but about the potential each of models have. As far as it goes it is possible to milk A LOT more cash out of F2P than P2P but the game needs to be good it can't be flop and the model must be implemented properly from the very start.
Learn to read.
GL in life with sucky economics.
PPS i even underlined the keyword for you.
EDIT: Hell, even ANet admitted F2P is better than P2P from financial point of view in one of their interviews.
EDIT2: Don't get shocked if Blizzard's new MMO will be B2P [variant of F2P]. I hope you'll remember my post then and pull your hair out
You might want to look a bit deeper into the why and the how of the LOL numbers process before they are proclaimed the god of all F2P games.
It is quite shifty to be sure.
"There is a certain undeniable power in the void; within lies an unspoken promise of greatness, the shadowy truth that man is ruled by fear not of what is seen, but of what he perceives is seen beyond."
Exactly like Revenus say. Besides I was talking about MMORPG not MMO/ dota like games. I was thinking it was obvious.
I am not against f2p in games like LoL. I actually think it is ok idea there. I just hate f2p in mmorpg's.
Besides in f2p games if you create account you're counted forever even if you stopped playing ages ago , in p2p active subscriptions are counted.
You're just being ridiculous. LoL is a MOBA. Nothing remotely close to an MMO. It has nothing to do with opinions, and everything with facts.
As for your OP,
-Most P2Ps do not have Cash Shops.
-You can play a P2P for a week, and even 2, without paying a monthly sub (Trial)
-You can try out most P2Ps too. Either in Beta or through Trials.
-You can convince your friends to play P2Ps too.
-Your credit card can be denied wether you pay for a P2P or buy items in a F2P. It makes no difference, and in the off-chance that your CC does get denied, you can always arrange this with your CC company. Not a big deal.
-Some players actually spend far more than $15 a month in F2Ps. Some do play entirely for free however.
-"The games have more players than most P2P games" I'd love to see your stats on this, because I don't believe it.
-F2P does sound better.
You'll need to come up with better reasons, yours are quite....bad. And before someone labels me as a hater, I'm actually a F2P supporter.
P2P are pay to win too, its only that not officially. RMT traders act as unofficial cash shops.
P2P offer an arbitrary incentive to pay once trial has finished (your N trial days are over, pay then!)
F2P offer an in-game incentive to pay ( player X dueled me and won... i need to enhance my equipment to defeat him)
I've had notice of people spending ridiculous amounts of cash in F2P games. Like enough cash to make a real world smithery shop smith for them that game items IRL.
As long as player advancement in MMORPGs is tedious, there will be pay-to-win services, official or not.
This is exactly what i fear a lot of people don't see or don't want to see.
You can pull the content card all you'd like but don't even try to pull the pay to win card because both models have been guilty of that for quite some time. People just don't want to admit it because it'll ruin their notion of the monthly fee somehow keeping them on equal footing with everyone else.
Its the exclusivity of cash shops that have some people who may of been excluded their whole lives feeling excluded again in a genre that used to be a refuge for people who might be excluded in real life cause of real life problems they can't control or were born with.
Paying someone else to farm gold for you is not the same as having cash shop exclusive items. All it does is merge the lines between our real life conditions and our virtual world persona. In short, they create a perception of exclusion, which is one of the reasons vanity items sell so well. People don't like feeling exluded.
"I swear -- by my life and my love for it -- that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."
- John Galt
Think about it.
Would you buy a game that turns out it be complete garbage or one that ends up closing down, or not paying next to nothing to try out a game?
And don't use that "free trail" excuse because only success stories have that option and it is simply false. It isn't FREE as your time is limited and you don't have access to most of the features.
What WoW is doing is quite clever; selling of some second rate game as completely free to play in the hope that they might subscribe to the real deal. Can't fool me!
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
You cannot play on and off. But symantics does not matter. You can call F2P an extended free trial too.
F2P has taken over because of how saturated the market is with new players that weren't here seven years ago, and the sheer amount of MMOGs that exist now. It's the only two factors that are really relevant.
That's the main funding model for F2P games. Instead of everyone paying an equal amount like in P2P, in F2P, a small amount of people pay a disproportionate ammount while a large majority pay very little or nothing.
Next week: Why grass is now red.
Ahh another one of these threads.
Many P2P only games have turned, after many successful years of P2P only, into a sort of unlimited free trial with paid for content. This leads some to say "omg all games are going f2p" those games are not F2P however. Such games include War,Lotro, D&D, Eq2, and more.
Then they see the fact that 10 f2p games a week are realeased. "OMG p2p is dead look at all the f2p games" Fact of the matter is, most of these games take advantage of the "its new" phenomina, trys to get you to spend some item mall money before realizing its all the same as last weeks release of 10 f2p games.
Then theres the common "game x no ones heard of has 32 billion players and its free so free games are more populair" overlooking the fact that one player can easily make 50 accounts and be counted as 50 players. Add to that anyone who passes by the game is counted as a player for life. You get the point.
Theres some sort of deep thirst among f2p only players, a thirst to make every game seem like it should go free, so that they can play all games without paying a dime, however quality games need investment money, they need a more accurate method of predicting how much money they will make to insure greater startup investment. Cash shop games lack this.
I think i saw examples in this thread of f2p's superiority being referenced to RoM, Allods, and LoL....youve got to be kidding me. RoM has what 2 servers that are barely full, for a f2p thats terrible. Reason is, its boring, its very cash shop dependant, if your not paying big bucks to dominate theres not a whole lot of reason to stick around either....Allods is a prime example of how a game with high hype, despite its clunky gameplay, can destroy itself via the cash shop, and LoL is a DOTA knockoff not even remotely a mmorpg...LoL is more a strategy game, since thats what its based off of. Even with that game, theres no way to tell how many people actually play and how many people, like me, signed up for two accounts and got bored of it after a week. Im sure i count for 2 of those million strong players or whatever.
Given the global recession, i would expect to see a whole lot more f2p games, which usually involve far less development and money to make, and far more canceld high budget AAA P2P games. Theres just more risk involved making them, more money needs to be rcouped, more investment is needed to make the appeal to the p2p crowd on top of needing quality content thats going to keep people subbed long term, rather than the get them in and get them in the CS quick modle preferd by the item mall games.
So call it a personal choice, but untill F2P games stop being a cash shop pissing contents as endgame, and starts developing a game that is by design meant to keep players entertained long term, ill stick with p2p. Theres a reason they dont need to release p2p games 5 a week like most of thes f2p design studios do...they keep their players longer, theres not a need to make a rehash every few months to keep the money flowing.
This is my favorite comment in this thread for obvious reasons. Thank you.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
The reason why your argument and thesis was bogus is because you are cherry picking the companys. Of course games produced by quality studios might have a higher potential if they went the P2W route. However, if you look at most studios they don't have Guild Wars or WOW to sway consumers to try their new product.
For the love of god would people stop lumping B2P in with P2W. They don't even have anything in common with one another.
I would also like to point out the current real world economic downward spiral.....Mabey bragging about being an economist during a period of time where the current method of economisc is proving to be a failure, isnt the best way to prove your mmo related argument.. Like those scientists who thought the world was flat just as it was being discoved that it wasnt...
If it's so great how come I'm not playing it then? Better yet how come I'm not playing F2P games or MMOs I guess that would be low quality , and cash shops and P2W bs I don't need or want. EVE brought a CS into their game I gave my account away to someone else. Star Trek Online threw it in the trash. The business aspect that has plagued videogames with DLC and introductions of cash shops across all fronts is a simple clear cut case of greed and a testament that they don't have a clear confidence in their products so hey lets milk these sorry s.o.b.s for all their worth the ones that are suckered into buying these items or advantages. But thats just my opinion.
Perhaps not the most convincing "counter-argument". It's like saying "Well if pastas are so great, how come I'm not eating pastas?" ...because you don't have to, nor need to. It's a matter of personal taste. WoW is a great game, 11 million subs don't lie. I don't play WoW however, in fact, I really don't like this type of game. It doesn't mean that WoW is a bad game, just...not for me.
Perhaps the MMOs you play, I'll find them to be of "low quality", and perhaps the MMOs I play you'll also find them to be of "low quality". It's a ridiculous debate not worth having. As for the F2P being "P2W" or not, depends on the games. LoL for instance (since it was mentionned) has no P2W option.
With all that said, OP's post regarding "LoL" being the most played MMO wasn't worth replying to. LoL is a MOBA to begin with, which is not even remotely close to an MMO.
In the end you dont play any mmo for real anymore.
Pay Two Play at least when you like it you dedication is higher then Free Two Play.
Ive played WoW for couple months and if i would write a review it would be rating it 5/10 becouse its crap, but its not my tast true.
Ive watch league of legens gameplay video i dont even try it out seems crap to me not my taste and not mmo ive in mind its just a rts game to me not an mmo.