Howdy, Stranger!

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

Is WoW going to be the last P2P MMO?

13

Comments

  • HyanmenHyanmen Member UncommonPosts: 5,357
    Originally posted by askdaboss

    It really doesn't matter that P2P "works" as long as the F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the developer prospective extra bucks, then they will go for it because it is the *best* model.

    This isn't even true. F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the investors more money faster. Most MMOs are financed by investors. Investors don't want to wait for their ROI. P2P + cash shop models on the other hand gives a steady cash cow for in-house investors. In-house financed MMOs are not popular any more, but it doesn't change the fact a long-term steady profit can be better financially than a short-term financial success, especially for the devs (who have very little say when investors are involved). It is only the best model for investors, not the players nor the devs.

    Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
  • Agent_JosephAgent_Joseph Member UncommonPosts: 1,361
    no, some KS crowdfunding mmo's are P2P ; Camelot Unchained  & Pathfinder
  • sayuusayuu Member RarePosts: 766
    Originally posted by Bascola
    Originally posted by Arazale
    Originally posted by Albatroes
    Originally posted by Arazale

    WoW isn't in the process of going hybrid in the slightest.

     

    You said yourself, mmo companies are in the business of making money. So if Blizzard thought WoW would make more money going f2p, they would go f2p. FFXIV ARR would have probably 1-2m subs if FFXIV 1.0 wasn't so shitty and burned so many people from ever trying the game, no matter how well they turned it around. Even with the blackmark, FFXIV ARR has managed 500k+ subscribers and actually growing and not losing subscribers.

     

    Clearly this shows there's nothing wrong with p2p mmorpgs. The only problem and i keep repeating this, is shitty games. When you force people to pay a monthly for a shitty game, don't act fucking surprised when people leave your game in hordes. Seriously, why the fuck are you surprised this happens and try to blame it on p2p? If you have a good game, people are going to shell out a monthly for it. End of story.

     

    Token isn't hybrid?

    Hybrid is a f2p game that also has the option for subscription for extra benefits like Tera or SWTOR or LOTRO. Every single person playing WoW even with the Token system, Blizzard is still making the same amount of $$. Because in order to use a token, someone has to have first bought the token.

    Hahah yeah don't bother to explain it, the WoW players do not understand this. They think they are playing for free if they farm gold and then buy a token. They totally can't wrap their heads around the fact that every Token used is $20 for Blizzard. Not only is it a full sub price of $15 it also comes with a premium of $5 for Blizzard.

    /smh

    And you seem unable to grasp the simple concept that for the person that buys the  token with gold doesn't pay any money to do so. . .making the aqusition of 30 days of access free to that player. . .so that Player IS PLAYING FOR FREE. . .I can break out the magic markers and whip up a Barney costume if your IQ still needs it dumbed down even further.

  • GeezerGamerGeezerGamer Member EpicPosts: 8,852

    This argument has been going on for years here. And from the very 1st post I have made on this topic, i have not changed what I have said.

    If they make a game that people want to keep logging into month after month, then they can charge a subscription fee.

    The subscription fee isn't dyeing because the model is out dated. The subscription fee is dyeing because no one can make a game that is good for more than a month.

  • MalaboogaMalabooga Member UncommonPosts: 2,977
    Originally posted by sayuu
    Originally posted by Bascola
    Originally posted by Arazale
    Originally posted by Albatroes
    Originally posted by Arazale

    WoW isn't in the process of going hybrid in the slightest.

     

    You said yourself, mmo companies are in the business of making money. So if Blizzard thought WoW would make more money going f2p, they would go f2p. FFXIV ARR would have probably 1-2m subs if FFXIV 1.0 wasn't so shitty and burned so many people from ever trying the game, no matter how well they turned it around. Even with the blackmark, FFXIV ARR has managed 500k+ subscribers and actually growing and not losing subscribers.

     

    Clearly this shows there's nothing wrong with p2p mmorpgs. The only problem and i keep repeating this, is shitty games. When you force people to pay a monthly for a shitty game, don't act fucking surprised when people leave your game in hordes. Seriously, why the fuck are you surprised this happens and try to blame it on p2p? If you have a good game, people are going to shell out a monthly for it. End of story.

     

    Token isn't hybrid?

    Hybrid is a f2p game that also has the option for subscription for extra benefits like Tera or SWTOR or LOTRO. Every single person playing WoW even with the Token system, Blizzard is still making the same amount of $$. Because in order to use a token, someone has to have first bought the token.

    Hahah yeah don't bother to explain it, the WoW players do not understand this. They think they are playing for free if they farm gold and then buy a token. They totally can't wrap their heads around the fact that every Token used is $20 for Blizzard. Not only is it a full sub price of $15 it also comes with a premium of $5 for Blizzard.

    /smh

    And you seem unable to grasp the simple concept that for the person that buys the  token with gold doesn't pay any money to do so. . .making the aqusition of 30 days of access free to that player. . .so that Player IS PLAYING FOR FREE. . .I can break out the magic markers and whip up a Barney costume if your IQ still needs it dumbed down even further.

    Nobody is playing WoW for free, get that notion out of your head. Each and every month every player plays in WoW is paid for. Its irrelevant WHO pays for it.

    Thats in the west of course, not to nitpick theres no sub in the east to start with.

  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Good MMO that the publisher waste hundreds of millions of dollars on the game will be able to survive as a sub based MMO.  If you spend $250 Million+ you cannot survive with 500K subs.  You spend around $50 Million and have 500K subs you will be fine with being a sub based MMO.  
  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Originally posted by Hyanmen
    Originally posted by askdaboss

    It really doesn't matter that P2P "works" as long as the F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the developer prospective extra bucks, then they will go for it because it is the *best* model.

    This isn't even true. F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the investors more money faster. Most MMOs are financed by investors. Investors don't want to wait for their ROI. P2P + cash shop models on the other hand gives a steady cash cow for in-house investors. In-house financed MMOs are not popular any more, but it doesn't change the fact a long-term steady profit can be better financially than a short-term financial success, especially for the devs (who have very little say when investors are involved). It is only the best model for investors, not the players nor the devs.

    100% this.

  • Pratt2112Pratt2112 Member UncommonPosts: 1,636
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by Hyanmen
    Originally posted by askdaboss

    It really doesn't matter that P2P "works" as long as the F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the developer prospective extra bucks, then they will go for it because it is the *best* model.

    This isn't even true. F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the investors more money faster. Most MMOs are financed by investors. Investors don't want to wait for their ROI. P2P + cash shop models on the other hand gives a steady cash cow for in-house investors. In-house financed MMOs are not popular any more, but it doesn't change the fact a long-term steady profit can be better financially than a short-term financial success, especially for the devs (who have very little say when investors are involved). It is only the best model for investors, not the players nor the devs.

    100% this.

    Bingo.

    It's so disappointing to see how many people believe F2P and, especially, Cash Shops exist for the benefit of the players.

    Does it help that a lot of people seem to like being able to throw their money at a game to obtain/achieve things, rather than actually playing it? I suppose so, though I don't get it. When I decide I want to play a game.. I want to play it.

    But then, that's been the case for a long time, now, going back to Ultima Online, and probably longer. People have been engaged in RMT, buying and selling in-game items, characters, items, services, etc. through eBay and other places.

    And for well over a decade, developers fought it because they saw the negative impact it could have on the game. It's probably not coincidence that only after WoW blew up and started attracting more investors and companies to make MMOs, that there was a change in attitude about RMT, and suddenly companies started looking for ways to embrace it for themselves... ie.  They saw RMT as a way to make even more money, without expending any additional effort, and set about trying to tap into it. The result is Cash Shops.

    They've done a wonderful job of getting their marketing and PR folks out into the field, arguing how Cash Shops are actually good, making it sound like it's a benefit to the player to replace a "restricting $15 monthly fee", with a cash shop where they could spend, literally 50 times that... but that's okay... because the game is free!

    And people, lacking in the ability to look at things critically, as many are, bought right into it.

    It's to the point now where people will mock pro-sub players for paying $15 a month to play a game... but then happily brag about how they spent several times that on cash-shop items (which would have been obtained in-game, and still insist they have the better deal.

    Because logic!

     

  • danwest58danwest58 Member RarePosts: 2,012
    Originally posted by Pratt2112
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by Hyanmen
    Originally posted by askdaboss

    It really doesn't matter that P2P "works" as long as the F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the developer prospective extra bucks, then they will go for it because it is the *best* model.

    This isn't even true. F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the investors more money faster. Most MMOs are financed by investors. Investors don't want to wait for their ROI. P2P + cash shop models on the other hand gives a steady cash cow for in-house investors. In-house financed MMOs are not popular any more, but it doesn't change the fact a long-term steady profit can be better financially than a short-term financial success, especially for the devs (who have very little say when investors are involved). It is only the best model for investors, not the players nor the devs.

    100% this.

    Bingo.

    It's so disappointing to see how many people believe F2P and, especially, Cash Shops exist for the benefit of the players.

    Does it help that a lot of people seem to like being able to throw their money at a game to obtain/achieve things, rather than actually playing it? I suppose so, though I don't get it. When I decide I want to play a game.. I want to play it.

    But then, that's been the case for a long time, now, going back to Ultima Online, and probably longer. People have been engaged in RMT, buying and selling in-game items, characters, items, services, etc. through eBay and other places.

    And for well over a decade, developers fought it because they saw the negative impact it could have on the game. It's probably not coincidence that only after WoW blew up and started attracting more investors and companies to make MMOs, that there was a change in attitude about RMT, and suddenly companies started looking for ways to embrace it for themselves... ie.  They saw RMT as a way to make even more money, without expending any additional effort, and set about trying to tap into it. The result is Cash Shops.

    They've done a wonderful job of getting their marketing and PR folks out into the field, arguing how Cash Shops are actually good, making it sound like it's a benefit to the player to replace a "restricting $15 monthly fee", with a cash shop where they could spend, literally 50 times that... but that's okay... because the game is free!

    And people, lacking in the ability to look at things critically, as many are, bought right into it.

    It's to the point now where people will mock pro-sub players for paying $15 a month to play a game... but then happily brag about how they spent several times that on cash-shop items (which would have been obtained in-game, and still insist they have the better deal.

    Because logic!

     

    I agree you with Pratt on this.  Today I stick to Sub games because I spend around $170 a year on the game vs a F2P game where I have to spend the money in the cash shop to get that item or spend endless hours grinding a currency to buy that item in game vs being able to do some content like a dungeon and have a chance at that drop.  I would rather spend my time playing vs spending my money.  I can see some cash shop stuff like FFXIV has and even what wow does today.  I just cannot see anything past that because then more development goes into that cash shop than the game.  

  • Leon1eLeon1e Member UncommonPosts: 791
    Nah I don't think so. There will be others that would want to herd the sheep (the ones begging for P2P MMOs and accept nothing less, even if overall better product). And once the herd is milked, they will switch business model. Kinda like TESO. Sadly the list doesn't end there. Every dawning MMO will flip business model. Unless you are Tabula Rasa. You are fucked if you are Tabula Rasa :D 
  • Alber_gamerAlber_gamer Member UncommonPosts: 588

    There will be more P2P mmo's, because it's a successful model that many of us prefer.

     

    The day everything is F2P (aka P2W) will be a sad day.

    My opinion is my own. I respect all other opinions and views equally, but keep in mind that my opinion will always be the best for me. That's why it's my opinion.

  • Leon1eLeon1e Member UncommonPosts: 791
    Originally posted by Alber_gamer

    There will be more P2P mmo's, because it's a successful model that many of us prefer.

     

    The day everything is F2P (aka P2W) will be a sad day.

    The most played F2P games are not P2W. Fact. Now stop trolling.

  • HyanmenHyanmen Member UncommonPosts: 5,357
    Originally posted by DMKano
    Originally posted by Pratt2112
    Originally posted by danwest58
    Originally posted by Hyanmen
    Originally posted by askdaboss

    It really doesn't matter that P2P "works" as long as the F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the developer prospective extra bucks, then they will go for it because it is the *best* model.

    This isn't even true. F2P/B2P + cash shop models gives the investors more money faster. Most MMOs are financed by investors. Investors don't want to wait for their ROI. P2P + cash shop models on the other hand gives a steady cash cow for in-house investors. In-house financed MMOs are not popular any more, but it doesn't change the fact a long-term steady profit can be better financially than a short-term financial success, especially for the devs (who have very little say when investors are involved). It is only the best model for investors, not the players nor the devs.

    100% this.

    Bingo.

    It's so disappointing to see how many people believe F2P and, especially, Cash Shops exist for the benefit of the players.

    Does it help that a lot of people seem to like being able to throw their money at a game to obtain/achieve things, rather than actually playing it? I suppose so, though I don't get it. When I decide I want to play a game.. I want to play it.

    But then, that's been the case for a long time, now, going back to Ultima Online, and probably longer. People have been engaged in RMT, buying and selling in-game items, characters, items, services, etc. through eBay and other places.

    And for well over a decade, developers fought it because they saw the negative impact it could have on the game. It's probably not coincidence that only after WoW blew up and started attracting more investors and companies to make MMOs, that there was a change in attitude about RMT, and suddenly companies started looking for ways to embrace it for themselves... ie.  They saw RMT as a way to make even more money, without expending any additional effort, and set about trying to tap into it. The result is Cash Shops.

    They've done a wonderful job of getting their marketing and PR folks out into the field, arguing how Cash Shops are actually good, making it sound like it's a benefit to the player to replace a "restricting $15 monthly fee", with a cash shop where they could spend, literally 50 times that... but that's okay... because the game is free!

    And people, lacking in the ability to look at things critically, as many are, bought right into it.

    It's to the point now where people will mock pro-sub players for paying $15 a month to play a game... but then happily brag about how they spent several times that on cash-shop items (which would have been obtained in-game, and still insist they have the better deal.

    Because logic!

     

     

    You are not considering the fact that players always wanted to spend more than $15 but couldn't as cash shops didn't exist and many players didn't want to engage In RMT. The success of cash shops speaks for itself - almost every game now has a cash shop regardless, and yet there are more MMO players now than ever. I'd rather give my money to game cash shop than 3rd party gold selling/item trading site - more money for devs means games keep on being developed. More sales in cash shop benefit developers as much as investors - to say that it only benefits investors is ludicrous - sales benefit both always.

    The problem here is "cash shop" is not a good or bad feature in itself. It is what the dev ends up doing with it that matters (and this is largely affected by the chosen payment model - F2P games are constantly pressured to walk the line between good and bad, even bordering on P2W at times, while P2P games can use it to offer more ethical features the players demand while still making some extra profit). Of course P2P games can go overboard with the cash shop too, but with the majority of the revenue coming from subs, less importance is given to the cash shop.

    I'm not sure who you are targeting that last sentence but the point is for the devs and the players F2P is often worse than a P2P solution, even though cash shop sales can and do benefit all parties.

    Using LOL is like saying "my argument sucks but I still want to disagree".
  • vgamervgamer Member Posts: 195
    Probably the last large p2p mmo. Never will a mmo reach the scale of wow again, unless it is absolutely revolutionary at all fronts. So no.
  • stevebombsquadstevebombsquad Member UncommonPosts: 884
    Originally posted by Leon1e
    Nah I don't think so. There will be others that would want to herd the sheep (the ones begging for P2P MMOs and accept nothing less, even if overall better product). And once the herd is milked, they will switch business model. Kinda like TESO. Sadly the list doesn't end there. Every dawning MMO will flip business model. Unless you are Tabula Rasa. You are fucked if you are Tabula Rasa :D 

    Really? Not likely. I don't see EvE or Final Fantasy XIV flipping anytime too soon. 

    James T. Kirk: All she's got isn't good enough! What else ya got?

  • CyraelCyrael Member UncommonPosts: 239
    WoW will go F2P before FFXIV. Yoshi-P has basically stated that outright.
  • Stimos8Stimos8 Member UncommonPosts: 163
    I hope not, the moment a game becomes free to play, all the trolls, game-hoppers and people that destroy a game environment become increasingly mixed into the game world. The game also loses regular funding, so its quality diminishes.
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by Stimos8
    I hope not, the moment a game becomes free to play, all the trolls, game-hoppers and people that destroy a game environment become increasingly mixed into the game world. The game also loses regular funding, so its quality diminishes.

    So losing over 3M subscribers - based solely on headline numbers - and then regaining 3M+ subscribers is due to something other than game hopping? When you factor in the normal churn the ups and downs are probably even greater.

    And Blizzard releasing no new content for over 14 months was due to it underfunded? And when they get round to releasing new content people had to pay for it over and above their subscription.

    Bottomline - based on what has happened with WoW in the last couple of years: a sub doesn't prevent game hopping - I would argue it encourages it and it clearly doesn't guarantee that a developer will spend any money on the game.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919

    Would expect a game like Eve to have a sub longer than WoW - smaller numbers, fewer options.

    If WoW declines what Activision could do - if they wished because WoW is so big - would be to take WoW b2p with paid DLC. I doubt they will for a while though. Wasn't any sign of them changing prior to WoD and they have bounced back so I think subs will have to fall well below 7M.

    Anything possible I suppose though.

  • h0tNstilettosh0tNstilettos Member Posts: 25
    Originally posted by observer
    Originally posted by Bascola
    Originally posted by observer
    Originally posted by Bascola

    What a silly question. Wow is by no means going to be the last one or the longest running.

    1. FFXI (13 Years, 2 years more than WoW)
    2. EvE Online (12 Years, 1 year longer than WoW)
    3. FFXIV (5 Years)
    Off the top of my head, you should do some research next time.
     

    Haha, wow.. so 3 out of dozens of MMO's out there.

    The truth is, even WoW isn't completely p2p.  It has a starter edition up to level 20 indefinitely.  It's also f2p on their test server whenever it's up.  EvE can be considered f2p also due to their plex system.  FFXIV seems to be the lone stranger to everyone else, especially with the announcement of ESO going b2p.

    That list only proves that those older MMO's were designed in a different era, with a different model, when players accepted it.  Times have changed since then.  B2P and F2P are here to stay.

    Players still accept it because they are still around and going strong. EvE is not F2P you need to subscribe to play. FFXI you conveniently ignored. Dark Age of Camelot (14 years, 3 years more than WoW) you ignored too.

    Those older MMO's? WOW is just as old.

    In EvE you can convert ISK to buy PLEX, which extends your game time.  The initial sub might be required still, but after that, you can keep playing indefinitely if you get more PLEX.  WoW will soon be adopting this system also.

    I didn't conveniently ignore those games.  Re-read what i wrote.

    "those older MMO's were designed in a different era, with a different model, when players accepted it. ".

    I also dont see how you can say those games are still going strong, when their sub numbers are abysmal.  They might be strong for niche and nostalgic players, but that's it.

     

    Abysmal!!?? FFXIV has millions of players. That is NOT abysmal. Sure it's still a lot less than WoW, but considering FFXIV's population has continued to grow and swallow everything in its path since it came out almost 2 years ago, you can't say abysmal. FFXIV, unlike other MMOs doesn't really see any pre-patch droughts due to how much content they release and more frequent than any other MMO at every 1.5 months, and 3 months for major content patches.

    Then again the 3rd post this thread was misleading as FFXIV has not been out 5 years as that horrendous, worst MMO of all time was scrapped and shut down as they remade a completely new game from the ground up as FFXIV: A Realm Reborn that has only been out almost 2 years. So maybe you were referring to that abysmal FFXIV that was scrapped.

  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    Abysmal!!?? FFXIV has millions of players. That is NOT abysmal. Sure it's still a lot less than WoW, but considering FFXIV's population has continued to grow and swallow everything in its path since it came out almost 2 years ago, you can't say abysmal. FFXIV, unlike other MMOs doesn't really see any pre-patch droughts due to how much content they release and more frequent than any other MMO at every 1.5 months, and 3 months for major content patches.

    Then again the OP was misleading as FFXIV has not been out 5 years as that horrendous, worst MMO of all time was scrapped and shut down as they remade a completely new game from the ground up as FFXIV: A Realm Reborn that has only been out almost 2 years. So maybe you were referring to that abysmal FFXIV that was scrapped.

    There is nothing "abysmal" about FFXIV and yes FFXIV does release new content on a regular basis however:

    • FFXIV was not closed down whilst a complete new game was made; it is the same game albeit "lovingly" reworked
    • FFXIV probably doesn't have "millions" of players; we know (from SE's recently published end of year results) that all 3 of SE's mmos made c. 6B yen last quarter. This revenue includes any box sales, cash shop revenue and subs. It represents stable revenue. It is good but if 100% of it were from FFXIV and 100% of it was from subscriptions then @$14 a sub Torval in another thread calculated it would be about 600k subs; at $11 a sub it could be 1.4M; and yes at $2 a sub it would be millions. As mentioned however the revenue was for all mmos and included box sales and any cash shop revenue in all mmos that SE run.
    • And revenue for all mmos for all four quarters was about 6B. The message SE are sending out is stable.
    • Last year SE said it had 1M+ subscribers across all 3 games; they haven't said this year. We don't know what that meant however. DQX, for example, has a 3 day sub option we just assume - wrongly - that it means monthly subs. Maybe DQX had a special weekend event last year and there was a sub spike. Or it could be FFXIV's China launch; this isn't bringing in much money yet (source: regional revenue for Asia for all SE products excluding Japan went up from just 0.2B yen to 0.3B yen could have brought in "many" extra subscribers. Who knows. It doesn't matter.
    Stable. Good. No problems. Nothing to suggest regular content will stop. That is SE's mmo message in their recent results. No need to push the boat out however. No need to get defensive or exaggerate.

     

  • h0tNstilettosh0tNstilettos Member Posts: 25
    Originally posted by gervaise1
    Originally posted by h0tNstilettos

    Abysmal!!?? FFXIV has millions of players. That is NOT abysmal. Sure it's still a lot less than WoW, but considering FFXIV's population has continued to grow and swallow everything in its path since it came out almost 2 years ago, you can't say abysmal. FFXIV, unlike other MMOs doesn't really see any pre-patch droughts due to how much content they release and more frequent than any other MMO at every 1.5 months, and 3 months for major content patches.

    Then again the OP was misleading as FFXIV has not been out 5 years as that horrendous, worst MMO of all time was scrapped and shut down as they remade a completely new game from the ground up as FFXIV: A Realm Reborn that has only been out almost 2 years. So maybe you were referring to that abysmal FFXIV that was scrapped.

    There is nothing "abysmal" about FFXIV and yes FFXIV does release new content on a regular basis however:

    • FFXIV was not closed down whilst a complete new game was made; it is the same game albeit "lovingly" reworked
    • FFXIV probably doesn't have "millions" of players; we know (from SE's recently published end of year results) that all 3 of SE's mmos made c. 6B yen last quarter. This revenue includes any box sales, cash shop revenue and subs. It represents stable revenue. It is good but if 100% of it were from FFXIV and 100% of it was from subscriptions then @$14 a sub Torval in another thread calculated it would be about 600k subs; at $11 a sub it could be 1.4M; and yes at $2 a sub it would be millions. As mentioned however the revenue was for all mmos and included box sales and any cash shop revenue in all mmos that SE run.
    • And revenue for all mmos for all four quarters was about 6B. The message SE are sending out is stable.
    • Last year SE said it had 1M+ subscribers across all 3 games; they haven't said this year. We don't know what that meant however. DQX, for example, has a 3 day sub option we just assume - wrongly - that it means monthly subs. Maybe DQX had a special weekend event last year and there was a sub spike. Or it could be FFXIV's China launch; this isn't bringing in much money yet (source: regional revenue for Asia for all SE products excluding Japan went up from just 0.2B yen to 0.3B yen could have brought in "many" extra subscribers. Who knows. It doesn't matter.
    Stable. Good. No problems. Nothing to suggest regular content will stop. That is SE's mmo message in their recent results. No need to push the boat out however. No need to get defensive or exaggerate.

     

    That thing about playerbase from all 3 of their MMOs that yourself and others spread around was a mistake made my Polygon earlier this year that they later apologized for. They published a report from March 2014 showing SE's subs in 2013 for their MMOs. Many publications trusted Polygon and also posted the same thing and it spread like wildfire. Scroll to the bottom of this article to read the mistake. http://www.polygon.com/2015/1/2/7480177/square-enix-final-fantasy-14-final-fantasy-11-dragon-quest-10-subscribers

    Also, yes FFXIV was closed down. They kept it up for a little while as a free game while they worked on FFXIV: A Realm Reborn. Then they shut down FFXIV and FFXIV: A Realm Reborn was released in late 2013. It was not 'reworked' as some people seem to believe. The only thing brought from FFXIV to ARR was some names of some dungeons, places, NPCs, etc, and a continuing story. ARR was a new game created from the ground up, not 'reworked'.

    I should also point out that SE does not use the word subscribers because not every country uses subscription for the game ever since it released for China late 2014. China for example uses game cards for time. FFXIV does have millions of players. There are regular queues just to get on the servers, and there are websites such as ffxivsoul and others that show active players vs non-active.

  • XImpalerXXImpalerX Member UncommonPosts: 606
    Originally posted by fivoroth
    Originally posted by DMKano

    A more relevant question would be

    How many major upcoming MMOs will be P2P?

     

    Yeah, I think you are right. The recent F2P conversion of so many MMOs makes you wonder if there will be any upcoming AAA MMOs which are P2P.

    Originally posted by Bascola

    What a silly question. Wow is by no means going to be the last one or the longest running.

    1. FFXI (13 Years, 2 years more than WoW)
    2. EvE Online (12 Years, 1 year longer than WoW)
    3. FFXIV (5 Years)

    Off the top of my head, you should do some research next time.

     

    I am well aware of which games are still P2P. There is very few of them left. FFXIV and DAOC are so ancient I am not even sure how many people play them. It MAY be that they are not F2P because the developer doesn't see the point of converting to F2P as these games are so old that they are unlikely to attract many new customers.

    EVE and FFXIV are the only ones which are doing okaish and I can see them remaining P2P - EVE due to its nature, FFXIV due to the stubborness of Square Enix.

    Wildstar is technically still P2P but we all know where that one is going given how horribly it failed at launch.

    FFXIV is ancient? huh???

  • AlverantAlverant Member RarePosts: 1,278

    I'm going to get all philosophical and say that until there are no such things as an MMO for all time, WoW is going to be "the last" of anything.

     

     

    I predict that one day on one planet somewhere out there, paying your monthly subscription fee would be just like paying your taxes or rent or internet bill; everyone has to do it or else you're going to be behind everyone socially and otherwise.

  • DullahanDullahan Member EpicPosts: 4,536

    There will be p2p MMOs long after WoW goes the way of the dinosaur.  Most games in this genre just aren't well suited for f2p.  F2P becomes more hated every day, and won't sustain most games for the long term.  Regardless of how games benefit initially when switching to f2p, its life support for a genre where new consistent content is crucial.

    Like I said on pg1, when people start making games worth playing again, especially for long term periods of time, people will gladly pay a measly $15, or $20 or even more for an MMORPG.


Sign In or Register to comment.