Howdy, Stranger!

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

Should Final Fantasy XIV go buy to play now?

TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 7,108
edited April 4 in Final Fantasy XIV
Reading some arguments by some of the players, it seems once you reach end game there is little for most folks to do once they play through expansion content; beyond the regular small updates in content.  It seems some state it just becomes a gear treadmill and does not warrant a constant subscription when there are many other games to play. Yeah there are diehards, but most spend time afk in the game. They have tried everything from recruit a friend to 14 day trial, to level 35 trial, and soon it may be rasied to 50. Maybe it's time to just go buy to play and get rid of the restrictions and let the money flow in from new players.

I find myself in this exact predicament with GW2 and end game. I log in just for a few dailies, return hardcore when there is an expansion or content addition, or a random achievement, but if I had to pay monthly for it I wouldn't do it. It's nice to come and go as I choose and buy what I want to buy. I would maybe sub once a year for 1 month just to cram in all the new stuff within a week or two, but I know I wouldn't get a full month of playtime. I feel that's the majority of players in Gw2. Play for 1-2 hours a day or week, or log in every few weeks.

As for FFXIV I think they could add buy to play with little change to what they are doing now. The game is aging and while there is a healthy population of players, not many new subscribers are being generated, which means less people buying items from the item store. Going buy to play and keeping the game at it's same price point would still allow a influx of new players who might end up staying and making purchases in their cash shop.

As a trial player there is just no point in making purchases in the cash shop, and why sub to another MMO when you know you will reach the inevitable endgame of nothing to do?

GW2 in my opinion is probably the most fair to play game on the market. It's worth what you pay. Most of the items sold in the BLC store are convenience items like in FFXIV, so the switch to buy to play would understandably be easier. Perhaps they could even add a system where you can purchase cash shop currency similar to gems in GW2 with ingame money to make a purchase in their cash shop (someone purchases gems and sells them for ingame gold).

No need for punishing mechanics, just full access to the game you bought, if you want a cash shop item break out the credit card, or get busy making money in the game. If you want a house plot but have little time to make the money ingame to buy one, break out the credit card, purchase some cash shop currency and sell it, win win.

Spam bots- I know this is a concern, but whatever anet is doing I haven't seen bot spam in years. If it does show up the player is gone faster than shit. Botters- I rarely see them, and again they don't last long and most are old stolen accounts which can happen in any game. Whatever anet is doing they are doing it right, maybe it's time SE do the same for FFXIV.

https://www.mmobomb.com/news/yoshida-ffxiv-go-free-play-80-90-players-want/





Post edited by Tiller on
«1

Comments

  • SinakuSinaku Member UncommonPosts: 541
    If it went buy to play and saw a substantial change to whats in the cash shop I don't think I would continue to play. I think that's one of the problems with trying to get new players is you have to think of drastic changes driving away your current player base. I for one hate free to play games with cash shops these days, but have had good interactions with B2P in ESO. However, it would really have to be done right, and marketed to the current fans in a positive way. My current view is no as our server pop seems just fine, and I never felt like my cheap sub (I only have one character) has gone to waste.
    JemAs666YaevinduskReyone1
  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 7,108
    Sinaku said:
    If it went buy to play and saw a substantial change to whats in the cash shop I don't think I would continue to play. I think that's one of the problems with trying to get new players is you have to think of drastic changes driving away your current player base. I for one hate free to play games with cash shops these days, but have had good interactions with B2P in ESO. However, it would really have to be done right, and marketed to the current fans in a positive way. My current view is no as our server pop seems just fine, and I never felt like my cheap sub (I only have one character) has gone to waste.
    I'm with you on the whole free to play thing. I think it would be terrible if they made this game free to play, which is why I threw this out there. Naoki Yoshida seemed to be kicking around the idea of f2p and how he could bring even more players in. That can ruin a game if you get too greedy, which is why I hope they think of buy to play before ever considering f2p.

      Question though. How is going buy to play with a model similar to say GW2 worse than having an unlimited time free trial to level 35 or 50 worse? Seems like having new players with no sub running around would be worse then just gating it with a purchase of the game. If everything in the shop remained the same and priced the same, but the method of buying it was changed, or modified would it effect existing players?




  • AlbatroesAlbatroes Member EpicPosts: 5,374
    Sinaku said:
    If it went buy to play and saw a substantial change to whats in the cash shop I don't think I would continue to play. I think that's one of the problems with trying to get new players is you have to think of drastic changes driving away your current player base. I for one hate free to play games with cash shops these days, but have had good interactions with B2P in ESO. However, it would really have to be done right, and marketed to the current fans in a positive way. My current view is no as our server pop seems just fine, and I never felt like my cheap sub (I only have one character) has gone to waste.
    Drastic change in the cash shop? The only thing that FFXIV's Cash shop doesn't sell that ESO's does is exp boosts, but then again they sell character boosts instead, all while requiring a sub, so I fail to see the difference between FFXIV and ESO except one requiring you to pay to access your goodies and one that does not. FFXIV's cash shop updates with vanity every month like clock work (twice last month to get a head start on Easter). The transition would be un-noticeable in its current state other than more vanity items being added to the store vs the game. Keep in mind that the game is already F2P in China and Korea which is where the structure of the boosts came from in the first place for FFXIV. The only thing I'm really wanting Yoshida to do (which he more likely can now that he's on the board) is getting a token system in place like in wow so I dont have to waste my money. The only thing a majority of people dump gil on is vanity related anyway (houses, furniture, outfits, etc) and if you're not subbing often, chances are you dont care about a house which is where the biggest gil sink is in the game (and you need to have been in your house at least once in 30 days in order to keep said house).
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 18,010
    They don't need to change anything. Why should they change their payment model if it's hitting revenue and player targets. If their player numbers support the game then leave it as is. Change always has unintended side effects. Why rock that boat.

    In any event I'd hate to see them go with the GW2 model. To me it feels like glorified F2P with loot crates and I don't see how FF14 would be better for that.

    If anything B2P like ZOS does with ESO where every content update costs money unless you sub. Of course that means something crucial will also be locked behind the sub and the cash shop would balloon with cosmetics and loot crates. I don't really see how FF14 would be better for that. If they could avoid the cash shop crack pipe it might work okay, but that's not realistic.

    So my vote would be to change nothing about the payment model unless they absolutely need to.
    JemAs666KyleranYaevinduskblueturtle13Reyone1
    traveller, interloper, anomaly

    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ


  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid Member EpicPosts: 9,378
    edited April 4
    I wont deny that if FFXIV had an optional subscription with constant releases of paid story content DLC/expansion like ESO,  i would be playing the game religiously. I buy every expansion even if i'm not subscribed anyway. I personally believe the ESO business model would bring more paying customers to FFXIV.

    With that said, i am OK with XIV being subscription only. I love the game, but as it is now i will just continue to only subscribe a couple times or less a year, nothing more. I do the same with WoW.
    Post edited by rojoArcueid on
    Torval




  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 7,108
    Torval said:
    They don't need to change anything. Why should they change their payment model if it's hitting revenue and player targets.
    Is it though in western markets compared to say Korea and China?

    I think it's being held back by the sub model. If nothing in the game was changed, no added fluff beyond you not needing to pay a sub how would it negativity impact you?

     You still buy expansions when they are released as you always have, you still buy stuff the same stuff out of their current cash shop as always and people still interact the same as they always have in the game. Unless you feel like paying the sub is putting karma into the universe, there is no reason not to make the switch. Like I said it could be done with no limitations to anyone. If it's just a physiological thing, then I don't know what to say to that.


  • PsYcHoGBRPsYcHoGBR Member UncommonPosts: 447
    I think ESO and Black Desert maintain a healthy population because they are buy to play. I would play FFXIV if it was buy to play.
    Margrave
  • DAOWAceDAOWAce Member UncommonPosts: 288
    Subbing for one month was enough to level multiple classes to cap and experience the story.. up until it got to raid crap to progress.

    Subscription based games are dying, and SE has been holding onto them for far, far too long.  The fact that FFXI is still a sub game after 15 years is baffling.

    With all the crap that happened with FFXIV (complete re-design/re-release of the game), it probably won't go B2P for quite some time.. if ever.

    But, if it does, I'd stay logged in and play Tetra Master every day.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 18,010
    It's always been held back by the subscription. Subscriptions are limiting. SE has been satisfied with the numbers up to this point though and are willing to accept that limitation.

    There are tradeoffs to dropping that gate. I certainly don't see any reason going B2P and dropping the sub would help them. They would just be losing sub money, not gaining more paying players.

    I haven't seen an argument yet that explains how it would benefit SquareEnix or the players that don't mind paying a sub. All I've seen are reasons why people don't want to pay their sub.

    Why should SE change the business model? Why would players want that? In what way would it benefit the current player base?
    blueturtle13
    traveller, interloper, anomaly

    ༼ つ ◕_◕ ༽つ


  • JemAs666JemAs666 Member UncommonPosts: 245
    edited April 4
    PsYcHoGBR said:
    I think ESO and Black Desert maintain a healthy population because they are buy to play. I would play FFXIV if it was buy to play.
    They don't want you to just play.  They want you to spend money either through a subscription or some "other means".  Subscriptions give them a somewhat known monthly income.  I am fairly sure people don't play ESO and BDO solely because they are B2P, but rather they enjoy the games.  I own both and never play  because I don't like either game.  For me the payment model had no involvement here or change my mind in playing.  Hey maybe this is just me though.
    Post edited by JemAs666 on
    Kyleran
  • Jamar870Jamar870 Member UncommonPosts: 287
    I like it to stay the way it is now. Like Torval said there could be unwelcomed unintended consequences. Let them change for reasons that are sound for them and not for those would don't seem to like the current model.
  • XatshXatsh Member UncommonPosts: 246
    I am highly against b2p and f2p.

    With that said FFXIV has a vanity cashshop already, which has no place in a p2p game.

    It has a massive lack of relevant endgame, and the patch cycles do not keep up with the fast pace content is cleared.

    Should it be B2P? Do not know. Honestly I would not play it if they paid me to play it because of the 2nd issue and the fact it is extremely shallow in terms of guilds, character development, and jobs. That and the game is a repeat every single 6-9months. Content is literally the same thing since 2.0 launched.

    Should be p2p? Hell no, there is simply not enough stuff to warrant a subscription. Why would anyone pay a sub to have 5-6hrs worth of progression content a week. Game needs 10xs the current top tier content to validate a sub in my opinion.

    The thing is they need to fix it to make p2p worthwhile in my opinion. But as many who quit realized... will never happen with Yoshida at the helm, he is just against that kind of game. Wants to be casual, easy to quit, easy to come back type game.

    P2P is great, if the game is worth it. For me ffxiv is just not a mmo worth it and B2P/P2P/F2P/P2W model will not change that fact, because it is still the same game with the same issues.
    estevan274Splooshii
  • Viper482Viper482 Member EpicPosts: 2,158
    If you aren't into the weird FF world I wouldn't bother. Typical themepark, more so than most even with very small, linear zones. The epitome of themepark kill this gather that questing outside of the main quest. Lots and lots of run here to there and back again even in the main quest. Sloooooooow combat. 

    If this were not a FF game I doubt it would be near as popular as it is.
    estevan274
    Make MMORPG's Great Again!
  • TillerTiller Member EpicPosts: 7,108
    Torval said:
    It's always been held back by the subscription. Subscriptions are limiting. SE has been satisfied with the numbers up to this point though and are willing to accept that limitation.

    There are tradeoffs to dropping that gate. I certainly don't see any reason going B2P and dropping the sub would help them. They would just be losing sub money, not gaining more paying players.

    I haven't seen an argument yet that explains how it would benefit SquareEnix or the players that don't mind paying a sub. All I've seen are reasons why people don't want to pay their sub.

    Why should SE change the business model? Why would players want that? In what way would it benefit the current player base?
    Sheesh you are kinda missing the point here. Sometimes it's not always about current customers, they eventually go away. You are forgetting that for an MMO to remain viable long term it has to bring in new players, and there is a dwindling pool of new players willing to pay for a sub to access any game (blame f2p generation).

    I'll just say it, all MMOs eventually go free to play to some extent if they are gonna survive.  Look at EQ1-2, look at WoW, EVE Online, all sub based games that allow other options. Eventually long term players will begin to drop off, new games, life, ect. Once those paying ones are gone they may remain gone.

    You might not see it here on this site, but on other games sites it's obvious with most of the younger millennials 18-29 or even younger, the idea of paying monthly for a game like this is not something they are interested in. The older millennials , gen Xers and younger baby boomers will begin to age out of the market. I know of lots of folks I played games with back in the days who have no time for MMOs. Where does that leave us?

     In fact FF already kind of has gone f2p to 35, now they are talking about making it 50 because there isn't enough of the game offered to entice many folks to buy and play, and he's kicking around the idea of going completely F2p. Why would he even mention it if it wasn't on the table? It's obvious they are trying to see what they can get away with by changing up the trial they offer. If you aren't seeing that then I don't know what to say. Just don't act surprised when it happens. I'm just pushing the buy to play option because it's obvious they are going to do something in the next few years, buy to play is the least annoying option. We should at least be able to agree on that.

     If Apple sold the same Iphone for 15 years at the same price point with nothing more than maybe adding a few firmware updates, do you think it would bring new people into the fold willing to pay that when they can get something newer and flashier for less or free? Should we all be paying 75 cents a minute to talk on our mobile devices? Would you pay by the minute in this day and age? What about mobile data? Do you still want to pay by the gig? or do you use unlimited? 

    Simple economics, you have to continue to be flexible in what you offer potential customers. It's not any different with say Comcast, newer customers get the perks current customers have no access to. You paid years of access, and enjoyed it. Time moves on. You have to continue to have new customer flow and change your revenue model to remain viable, it's obvious they are seeing this, otherwise it would never have been up for discussion.





    estevan274


  • AkulasAkulas Member UncommonPosts: 2,305
    It comes down to do you want to pay a sub to raid on your 5th alt class and get your 6th alt class or get the last couple of levels on fishing while waiting for a que as dps.

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

  • acidbloodacidblood Member RarePosts: 778
    Not sure the math would add up on that... I mean, sure, there may be a short term influx of new players, but over time, unless those new players spend enough to cover the loss of subs from the current player base then what's the point?

    FFXIV is a game that only appeals to certain tastes (grindy, relatively slow combat, do need to pay attention and know what you are doing at end game, etc.), and the with the current housing system, it's much more a lack of supply than a lack of funds that locks people out. Also, not to sound elitist, but FFXIV doesn't really lend itself well to new players, becoming a lot more enjoyable at higher levels than it is during the initial levelling / MSQ slog (so at a minimum that would need to be fixed).

    All that said, the way they have been doing content (basically just a coat of paint every few months), and with most of the new content being hit or miss (and none of it designed to last any length of time), a lot of people play FFXIV in an almost B2P style anyway*

    * Unless you own a house you want to keep, in which case you pretty much need to pay a monthly sub just to prevent it from getting knocked down.
    estevan274
  • estevan274estevan274 Member UncommonPosts: 8
    Xatsh said:
    I am highly against b2p and f2p.

    With that said FFXIV has a vanity cashshop already, which has no place in a p2p game.

    It has a massive lack of relevant endgame, and the patch cycles do not keep up with the fast pace content is cleared.

    Should it be B2P? Do not know. Honestly I would not play it if they paid me to play it because of the 2nd issue and the fact it is extremely shallow in terms of guilds, character development, and jobs. That and the game is a repeat every single 6-9months. Content is literally the same thing since 2.0 launched.

    Should be p2p? Hell no, there is simply not enough stuff to warrant a subscription. Why would anyone pay a sub to have 5-6hrs worth of progression content a week. Game needs 10xs the current top tier content to validate a sub in my opinion.

    The thing is they need to fix it to make p2p worthwhile in my opinion. But as many who quit realized... will never happen with Yoshida at the helm, he is just against that kind of game. Wants to be casual, easy to quit, easy to come back type game.

    P2P is great, if the game is worth it. For me ffxiv is just not a mmo worth it and B2P/P2P/F2P/P2W model will not change that fact, because it is still the same game with the same issues.


    FF has not the kind of playerbase who could do that end game content, so it's not a matter of Yoshida or not-Yoshida.

    Savage and ultimate fights are a niche content, the real endgame is "show your house" and "cosmetic contests" (it seems a joke, isn't it?)

  • WarlyxWarlyx Member RarePosts: 2,683
    dont think so , the updates would come even more slowly , and would be paid (DLC) , it would be a free card to add anything to the cash shop , and i dont think SE would do it ever (FFXI is still a sub game) on the other side yep , it would be an awesome b2p game , that could work like TESO and bring more players to the game. Dunno about pop , but doesnt look like the game like players (it isnt LOL nor WoW and doesnt need to ).
    Torval
  • Panther2103Panther2103 Member EpicPosts: 4,624
    No. It's still got a huge population and is still doing great with constant updates and very little items in the cash shop. It would ruin it to go B2P.
    Torvalblueturtle13Reyone1
  • blamo2000blamo2000 Member UncommonPosts: 558
    For me, subscription versus b2p versus f2p doesn't matter.  What matters is if there is something to do that interests me.  I like fiddling around with builds and stick to games that decent rpg systems and character development.  FF has nothing for me.  Its like they only considered seven year olds, with a chardev focused on grinding every class with one character for almost no chardev benefit.  

    I liked when wow had skill trees and they fiddled with them and added new systems like glyphs, etc.  That gives me a reason to play, a reason to look forward to patches, a reason to do the arena, a reason to level up alts, a reason to want more gear.  Without a decent chardev system, there is no carrot, nor stick, nor anything worth considering.

    This developing games for kids and a kid's comprehension just isn't a good long term goal for a game, nor for the gaming industry.
  • TheDarkrayneTheDarkrayne Member EpicPosts: 4,053
    I would play it again if it went BTP and drop some money on the cash shop from time to time. Hell, I'd probably sub even if I don't have to.

    I often reinstall ESO and jump back in because it's an option to do that without paying. Every time I've done that I subscribe again for a month or two for the crafting bag, with no regrets. Making a game BTP opens the game up for previous players to get hooked again and it seems to work with me, at least.

    I think FFXIV's biggest problem is that the base game is a lot weaker than all the expansions and it takes a looong time to get to the good stuff. I'd guess a lot of people would be more likely to push through to that point casually if there wasn't a monthly fee. I know I'd have preferred to play it that way anyway... instead of feeling like I was trying to get my moneys worth and smashing through the weaker content all at once. A casual approach would make it less painful and less boring, I suppose.
    I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
  • centkincentkin Member UncommonPosts: 1,374
    They could always have people who are leveling pay at one rate for the content they are using and people who are capped at a lower price for maintenance fees. 
  • KajidourdenKajidourden Member EpicPosts: 2,384
    Why the hell would they?  It would be a monumentally stupid business decision.
    Reyone1
  • InDLegacyInDLegacy Member UncommonPosts: 14
    edited June 27
    I realize this reply is months late but... here we go.

    This reads like a veiled subscription whining thread. 

    First of all.  FFXIV has a growing community, not a dying one.  You don't ask questions like these until you see a major falloff in players.

    Second of all.  Regardless of how you feel about the frequency or size of content drops, FFXIV still has the fastest content release schedule.  This is in part supported by the subscription model. 

    Third of all.  Is it bad that people find themselves unsubscribing when they have nothing left to do?  Naoki Yoshida has stated that he never intended to create a game that made players feel obligated to keep their subscriptions active all year round.  While there is plenty to do that has nothing to do with progression or story development, none of it is shoe-horned into your mouth.  So yes, subscribe when a content patch drops for a month.  Then don't subscribe for two to three months, thats fine.

    Fourth, comparisons.  Maybe its because most of you have no idea what the FFXIV community is actually like.  But as you really should expect, Final Fantasy has a cult following.  And a large part of the player base is actually interested in just hanging around the world that has been built for them.  Whether its to role play or just hang out with friends.  You all might consider FFXIV just another game to play through and then move on, but for a lot of these people it is much more than that.  This is especially true considering the extreme amount of feature fetish Square Enix injects into the game with every content patch.  Most of it would be irrelevant nonsense to the typical MMORPG progression buff.  So trying to compare this game to ESO or GW2 or BDO just doesn't work.  Not when for so many players this is actually not just another MMO, but a constantly evolving Final Fantasy game.

    This is why FFXI still has a subscription model after 15 years with a player base that's healthy.  MMOs with subscription models have come and died.  MMOs with subscription models that went buy to play or free to play have come and died.  If any of them could even keep a consistent 100k active subscribers all year round their devs would cream their pants.  For all the games, music, and other content Square Enix has released over the years, FFXI was the game that earned them the most money... until FFXIV ARR 2015~
    Post edited by InDLegacy on
  • AkulasAkulas Member UncommonPosts: 2,305
    Nope. Sub only or gtfo.
    Reyone1

    This isn't a signature, you just think it is.

Sign In or Register to comment.