f2p is free for ... 90% of the players, at least for this game.

nariusseldon

https://mmohuts.com/news/stronghold-kingdoms-celebrates-5-million-players

and I quote:

"Developer and publisher Firefly Studios today announced that their popular ‘Castle MMO’ Stronghold Kingdoms has now passed 5 million registered players. With a 10% lifetime conversion rate and more active players on Steam than games from colossal IPs such as Star Trek, Lord of the Rings and DC Comics, Firefly is thrilled with the continued success of their first ever free-to-play game."

so 10% lifetime conversion is great and firefly is "thrilled with continued success".

SEANMCAD

and this is in 'The Pub' section why?

Quizzical

SEANMCAD said:

and this is in 'The Pub' section why?

Because they deleted most of the game-specific forums, so game specific threads for the relatively less popular games go in The Pub.

SEANMCAD

Quizzical said:

SEANMCAD said:

and this is in 'The Pub' section why?

Because they deleted most of the game-specific forums, so game specific threads for the relatively less popular games go in The Pub.

fair enough

thinktank001

nariusseldon said:

and I quote:

"Developer and publisher Firefly Studios today announced that their popular ‘Castle MMO’ Stronghold Kingdoms has now passed 5 million registered players. With a 10% lifetime conversion rate and more active players on Steam than games from colossal IPs such as Star Trek, Lord of the Rings and DC Comics, Firefly is thrilled with the continued success of their first ever free-to-play game."

so 10% lifetime conversion is great and firefly is "thrilled with continued success".

Lets break down your quote:

- Over 5 million registered players......

What the article doesn't tell you is the game was released back in 2009.  How many of those 5 million do you still think play this game?

- 10% lifetime conversion rate........

With the long life of this game there is probably very little population still playing, and aside from poorly developed microtransaction games I don't know anyone that would consider those numbers good.

- more active players on steam than game "xxxx".........

Xfire numbers have already been proven worthless outside of identifying trends.  Did these people not get the memo?

- first ever microtransaction game........

They built it back in 2009, reskinned it 6 times and called it a different game over the last 7 years.  I guess you could call that success.

nariusseldon

thinktank001 said:

They built it back in 2009, reskinned it 6 times and called it a different game over the last 7 years.  I guess you could call that success.

Not me. The company called it success. If you have an issue with that, you can take it up with them. In fact, the word "success" is always inside a quote.

AAAMEOW

I think that number is a bit misleading.  Since most of those players probably quit in 3 days.

nariusseldon

AAAMEOW said:

I think that number is a bit misleading.  Since most of those players probably quit in 3 days.

For f2p MMOs, most quite in 30 days. 66% are left in 3 days. So you are wrong.

https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/

And why would the number be misleading? The 10% number is clearly stated as the "life-time conversion" rate. So most players who have played, and are playing the game pay nothing.

What is misleading about that statement? 

vonryan123

yea so the same people that wiped my shit and made a new game instead of fixing the last one? right let me jump right in

aRtFuLThinG

I think for a game that is such a low budget production for the company that developed it, any money made is already an amazing success.

nariusseldon

aRtFuLThinG said:

I think for a game that is such a low budget production for the company that developed it, any money made is already an amazing success.

The company seems to believe so.

Axehilt

10% is an impressively high conversion rate relative to most F2P games.  The only other F2P game I've ever heard being higher was TF2 (and I'm fairly certain their conversion numbers included all the box sales prior to going F2P, so it isn't actually all F2P conversion.)

Played Stronghold Kingdoms myself for a bit, but while it had some nice elements it wasn't a very good online strategy game overall and I dropped out pretty quick.

nariusseldon

Axehilt said:

10% is an impressively high conversion rate relative to most F2P games.  The only other F2P game I've ever heard being higher was TF2 (and I'm fairly certain their conversion numbers included all the box sales prior to going F2P, so it isn't actually all F2P conversion.)

Played Stronghold Kingdoms myself for a bit, but while it had some nice elements it wasn't a very good online strategy game overall and I dropped out pretty quick.

Very much so.

I think the highest I have seen is World of Tanks, which claim something like a 25% conversion. But again ... 99% of the games are probably stuck at low single digit conversion rates. 

goboygo

So 10% of the population is spending more than they should have to so others can play for free.......

Sounds like a great deal for the people with no money.

nariusseldon

goboygo said:

So 10% of the population is spending more than they should have to so others can play for free.......

Sounds like a great deal for the people with no money.

You are confused between "unable to pay" to "unwilling to pay".

It is a great deal for those who have better use for their money than MMOs. Case in point, I would much rather spend $50 on a bottle of wine than on MMOs. 

Deivos

If you wanna be more accurate the average conversion rate for all F2P games rests close to 5%, however the F2P market for PC games sits higher at around 8%. So 10% isn't actually a dramatic spike. Couple this with the understanding that the majority of titles that flood the market as F2P greatly skews the metrics as well since there is a large cross-section of what is effectively junk that people sift through and dabble money into.

Some notable examples of PC being;

• Tribes Ascend: 10%(Gamasutra, July 2013)
• Team Fortress: 20-30%, (Gabe Newell, Geekwire interview)
• APB, Reloaded: 7%, (Bjorn Book-Larsson, GDC 2012)
• World of Tanks, Wargaming.net: 30% (Edge)
• AI War, Arcen Games: 15% (Cliffski's blog comments)
• Autoclub Revolution, Eutechnyx: 9% (The A List, 6/28/12)

A couple are in there mostly as examples of not quite good PC games (APB, Autoclub) and where they are still hitting near the mark for PC conversion rates, with some standout titles as well.

The other point to be made is the 10% conversion does not account for how many people drop off playing (SWRVE analytics reports an average of two-thirds drop off playing after day one for F2P as a whole). This skews things highly because the total sub base is generally very different from the active daily/weekly user count.

For the most part this is just a company drumming up enthusiasm where they can for marketing.

nariusseldon

Deivos said:

The other point to be made is the 10% conversion does not account for how many people drop off playing (SWRVE analytics reports an average of two-thirds drop off playing after day one for F2P as a whole). This skews things highly because the total sub base is generally very different from the active daily/weekly user count.

and this article says that f2p MMO drop off is only 17% in a day, but 80% in 30 days.

https://www.superdataresearch.com/blog/understanding-mmo-retention/

But again, it will need a huge table if you want to look at the conversion for people who have played different amounts of time.

It is quite clear that the average 8% (you mentioned) includes everyone from those who played once, and those who played a year. In fact, those who jump around more probably are enjoying more games for free. In any case, do you dispute the basic point that a lot of players jump around and pay nothing playing f2p MMOs?

Deivos

nariusseldon said:
In any case, do you dispute the basic point that a lot of players jump around and pay nothing playing f2p MMOs?

Why would I dispute that people churn through a lot of crap looking for a decent game?

cheyane

I do see how the players who pay nothing would want to play a game that others are paying so they might play but it continues to baffle me why the people paying would continue to fund the others. It makes me wonder why if I were a paying player I would continue to support a game where I am supporting 90% of the player base. Why would I be that stupid is the question that swirls around my brain.

I have examined it that the game must have some mechanic I enjoy but then what can this game offer that I cannot get from another game that has others also supporting the cost of the game. People say it is population but with many games going solo play this does not seem an adequate enough reason for me to pay while others don't.

Plus more often than not the game must have some mechanic to encourage me to spend so that I can continue to fund the other non paying players. This part is the one that irks me because they are spending time creating content for me to spend money so that 90% of the player base can play for free from the amount I spend from this specially tailored content. Even typing this is making me upset.

All in all I really cannot understand why I would ever spend money to support a game like this.

Heronn

Would you rather spend what you earn contributing to an idea of what an mmo should like eg: with expansive/limitless possibilities and open doors all round, or subscribe to the fact you are just merely playing a game that wants to be associated with a massively multiplayer 'playerbase' while it is being constantly constrained by a resource we all know as money.

I do believe its time for the pro-subscription folks to give up the fight. Its an old old system that used to work, nothing more needs to be said.

AAAMEOW

I understand your point about many game hoppers.

My point is many people try out games, find it sucks, and quit immediatly.

They didn't pay because the game sucks.  Not because they actually trying to play for free.

nariusseldon

cheyane said:

I do see how the players who pay nothing would want to play a game that others are paying so they might play but it continues to baffle me why the people paying would continue to fund the others.

Whales are mysterious. But remember p2w? May be some really want to feel good & powerful about themselves, and becoming a whale is the easiest, fastest way to do so?

nariusseldon

AAAMEOW said:

I understand your point about many game hoppers.

My point is many people try out games, find it sucks, and quit immediatly.

They didn't pay because the game sucks.  Not because they actually trying to play for free.

Or they have fun for a week, and now what some different fun? You can speculate all you want. But the bottomline is that most don't pay for their MMOs. 

nariusseldon

Heronn said:

I do believe its time for the pro-subscription folks to give up the fight. Its an old old system that used to work, nothing more needs to be said.

I think it is pretty clear that the sub-only era is over. This topic is not about that. This is about looking at how many actually pay in f2p games. 

sunandshadow

I played that game, and it's kind of awful.  Maybe slightly better than Goodgame Empire or Evony, but that's not saying much.

AAAMEOW

nariusseldon said:

AAAMEOW said:

I understand your point about many game hoppers.

My point is many people try out games, find it sucks, and quit immediatly.

They didn't pay because the game sucks.  Not because they actually trying to play for free.

Or they have fun for a week, and now what some different fun? You can speculate all you want. But the bottomline is that most don't pay for their MMOs. 

Obviously both type exist.  There are at least two on this forum advertising how they are having fun hopping games without paying.

I don't find the topic even revelant though, you can't prove if it is actually people playing the game, or people just trying out games to see if it suck.

Just like all the mmorpg advertising they have 100 million players, when in reality their concurrent players probably really low.