This question has far to many variables to reliably answer truthfully. For example, if you said every FTP at that point is exactly like playing R.O.S.E online, then I would never play ever again. But if the FTPs at that point are more like LOTRO then I'll still play. You see, it's the quality of the game that still matters.
Come to think of it, I see a few FTPs coming out of the east that, so far, look phenomenal. Look at Age of Wulin. That game looks fantastic. Maybe FTPs of the kind we have seen before are starting to change and transition as well and getting, dare I say it, better?
To me it's quality, and the existence of a cash shop. I will not play a game with a cash shop that sells in game items with stats, or xp potions.
The US economy is in shambles, if the deal doesn't go through most will be lucky to pay for food with the dollar. F2P is going to win because people will not play for P2P in crisis.
Many MMO players are jobless, I can not stress the importance this will have on F2P vs P2P.
I was reading through the comments to this thread and happened upon the one above. Now, this is not a slam at the person that made the comment but the statement above is illogical. First, you assume too much. The dollar is going to crash; infaltion is so high we can barely pay for food and such; and most people will be unemployeed. How does making a game "f2p" make it workable? The so-called "f2p" model is based upon the idea that companies draw in enough people because of the "free" part. They then DEPEND upon people spending REAL money in order to make a profit to keep the GAME COMPANY afloat (not the game). IF there are not enough people spending REAL money, the game and possibly the game comany suffer and go away. The "free" part does not make any money. It does not cause more content to added or old content to be bug-fixed. It is the money from those spending real money that does that. So, if the economy is in such dire shape, how does that bode any better for a so-called f2p MMO model?
F2P is a great short term thing for those that don't want to spend real money. Problem is, that if everyone did not spend money there would no longer be any F2P games.....something to ponder.
To the original poster; I will just find a game that I enjoy playing with some friends and play it. I don't really care if I have to pay or not. If it's a good game, I'll play.
After playing mmo's for over 10 years now, I have learned, it's not the game, it's with whom you play. As long as I have some good buddies to cut up with over Vent/TS, I'm good.
Alarm bells? I'll have alarm bells when it looks like my company may go under. IF there may be a time where none of the games availabe are worth my time...I'll just do something else.
You should feel reasonably secure, however. If there are really people out there that are wringing their hands at the thought of not having a p2p game to throw their money at, someone, somewhere will keep making those games.
This question is irrelevant because solid AAA MMOs wont vanish nor turn F2P.
Oh, and I dont oppose F2P. It should just happen on different servers. As long as that criterion is met, I'm perfectly cool with it.
Originally posted by Gabby-air
If no good quality games come out well then it's time to leave, really simple as that. But their will be a demand for them and I don't see it happening.
Agreed, there is a large enough market for P2P games and so they will continue to be made.
And if it would actually stop ... I would stop playing.
the cream of the crop will always be P2P, while the chaff/crap and everything else will be F2P and I have no issue with this at all, most of the games that are F2P now are games that simply would not have made their developers any money as a P2P game. they were never good enough.
I'll do what i've been doing for the past 3 years. Play nothing and wait.
I've played Guild Wars here and there and now im waiting for GW2 Which will be a AAA game like Guild Wars I'm sure. I'm done paying $15 a month for MMOs devs just aren't making them any better than when they were first made. Freemium is just horrible. I really hope more companies take notice of Anets payment model. It was successful with Guild Wars and it'll be great with Gw2 most likely.
Err ... GW wasnt AAA. It was a rather simplistic game with niceish graphics. Maybe there was a lot of content, I dunno, I didnt played very long before I was bored out of my mind. But the rulesystem was simple (nice, yes, but simple) and crafting could only be called primitive.
If more game companies would use that model, a lot of them would fail for obvious reasons. To succeed at this model, you need a constant stream of new sales - of people who buy the game, but dont actually play the game.
The US economy is in shambles, if the deal doesn't go through most will be lucky to pay for food with the dollar. F2P is going to win because people will not play for P2P in crisis.
Many MMO players are jobless, I can not stress the importance this will have on F2P vs P2P.
I doubt that most of the posters on this site know what you're talking about. Probably why no one commented on it. Oh sure....some might. But one way or the other, you're right that this could have an effect.....on everything, not just games.
I will play F2P games only if I have no other choice. However, if I can't afford P2P games, then I probably also cannot afford the internet, so....you know.....would make it hard to play anything.
The US economy is in shambles, if the deal doesn't go through most will be lucky to pay for food with the dollar. F2P is going to win because people will not play for P2P in crisis.
Many MMO players are jobless, I can not stress the importance this will have on F2P vs P2P.
I doubt that most of the posters on this site know what you're talking about. Probably why no one commented on it. Oh sure....some might. But one way or the other, you're right that this could have an effect.....on everything, not just games.
I will play F2P games only if I have no other choice. However, if I can't afford P2P games, then I probably also cannot afford the internet, so....you know.....would make it hard to play anything.
Deal was signed last evening, crisis averted, next on the agenda, meteor strike in 2029....
If the US economy is in shambles, where does that leave most of the rest of the world?
But good point, F2P games are great for the unemployed...
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The US economy is in shambles, if the deal doesn't go through most will be lucky to pay for food with the dollar. F2P is going to win because people will not play for P2P in crisis.
Many MMO players are jobless, I can not stress the importance this will have on F2P vs P2P.
I doubt that most of the posters on this site know what you're talking about. Probably why no one commented on it. Oh sure....some might. But one way or the other, you're right that this could have an effect.....on everything, not just games.
I will play F2P games only if I have no other choice. However, if I can't afford P2P games, then I probably also cannot afford the internet, so....you know.....would make it hard to play anything.
The funny thing is, when I speak to most of my friends, who all play games, the "bad" economy hasn't really hit any of them. I feel for those it has hit, but lets face it, video games are a complete and utter luxury and by the way the business is booming, it makes you wonder. Chances are, if you're reading this site.. you have the extra money for the internet and to spend on games. It don't think the economy will affect the video game market as much as you think.
I will continue to pay for games that warrant a payment. If I'm having fun, you gleefully get my coin. If the games sucks, I won't play it even if it's free.
I've played both types of games but prefer the p2p types. F2P really isn't all that free if you want to play with all the bells and whistles or high end gear. I see F2P as an extended trail to see if investing in the game is worth while. I don't have any problem with games such as STO having a P2P with a cash shop as long as you can get the stat items in game or it just sells fluff stuff.
I really don't see P2P type games going under as the author here thinks, but if they did I would look for a F2P game such as Uncharted Waters to play, and pay to play (cash shop) that game properly!
The question is a simple one, but reuires stepping outside of the 'now' and looking forward to answer,which is something gamer's are usually not that good at.
This is the semi opinion, semi fact bit;
What I am asking is; once the current crrop of AAA MMORPGs that have been converted to a 'Freemium' model have gotten too old for you to want to play and all that are made are cheap real 'F2P' games, what will that mean for games and gamers?
Is the AAA sub quality MMORPG dead man walking?
Will you happily swtich to the 'real' F2P games once they are gone or are unappealing to play anymore due to age?
This is the all out opinion bit;
The current crop of converted games, that so many love, would never have been made the way they are, from basic game design philosophy through to everything else, under a true F2P model.
The converted AAA games are repeatedly falsely used as poster boys for all 'F2P' games, but we all know they do not represent games that are built from the ground up to exploit and push a cash shop.
We will probably never see their like again once they have gone in all honesty. The next generation of games (anything entering development from this point onwards) will not be the same animal at all as those converted AAA ones around today.
By then though they will have served as a bridge to all out cash shop domination (as per the REAL type of cash shop domination that the REAL'F2P' games use) and it will be too late to expect anything else because yet another generation of gamers won't expect anything better.
Does this ring any alarm bells for anyone? Does anyone care about whats coming down the road as long as they have something to play today?
I hope they will not take over completly but, sadly I see a great many people that think F2P is all that wonderful they are simpley not thinking about where that model will take them.
Company's make mmo's or fps or what ever it is to make money, that is the bottom line. Cash stores give them a pretty much limitless way to make money. All they have to do is put out a new set of gear that is better even if just a little better then the last set of gear and these people that think that they are saving money because they pay once to have gear permenatly are not thinking about 1. how often do you have to pay that big chunck ? 2. how much does each chunk cost you ?
Example, you start a new F2P it cost you nothing, the first thing you have to do is get gear, so you drop $90 to get this gear you need, you pay nothing for 6 months at this point they release a new gear pack, the new stuff hits harder, shots further and deflects more damage then your old stuff so you drop another $90. Guess what ? you just spent $180 for a year of play time, how much does $15 x 12 for a year to play cost you? $180 you have saved nothing.
The numbers i stated are generous the reality is that in games such as combat arms, battle field play 4 free the cost to upgrade your gear is closer to about $120 each time, so over a year you spend $240ish to stay uber.
There are a few games as you mentioned that are on a free to play model that were originally designed for a sub plan, These games are testing the water IMO. They are tryng to see just how many people they can get to buy things from there store and I promise you they have the corperate bean counters watching this closly, if a lot of people show the tendancy to pay for dungeons to get that uber gear and they come up with the fact that they make more that way then they do by charging subs then that is the way they are going to go.
People need to get it through there heads, these company's are running a business. They are not going to go to a model that makes them less money. They can't. Here is why, most company's have investors, the investors could care less about a quality game with good graphics, all the investors want to see is a reacuring increase in there investment. When the investors stop gaining money on there investment they sell and look for something else to put there money in that will make them money. When they sell, a share of the company's profits go to that person if they can not find someone else to purchase those shares the company has to buy them back. If enough investors sell there shares at the same time the company will show as losing money, now they have a hard time getting more investors because they are losing money and no one wants to lose on there investment.
Now look at the fact that any game company has money invested in a game before any player ever sets foot in it, or do you really believe that devolpers and story tellers work for free ? The company has to show they can make that money back and make a profit to apeal to investors, the more they can show they can make the higher the apeal, the more likely they are to get investors. On a free to play system they can not yet accurately predict how many people will be willing to pay for stuff hence they are testing the waters on titles such as LOTRO which by now they have more then likely made there money from and the risk is small in seeing how this pans out.
In many cases all of the above and the cost that will be incured to operate the server including owning vs renting, leasing a building to house said servers or at very least to house the support staff, all plays a role in how much you pay. That is really business 101. What I have typed here, as long winded as it looks is really just the tip of the iceburg and is far from a complete or detailed plan they would need to have just to think about making a game. If you think for one second they are not weighing the cost against the profit then you just are not thinking it through.
The US economy is in shambles, if the deal doesn't go through most will be lucky to pay for food with the dollar. F2P is going to win because people will not play for P2P in crisis.
Many MMO players are jobless, I can not stress the importance this will have on F2P vs P2P.
I doubt that most of the posters on this site know what you're talking about. Probably why no one commented on it. Oh sure....some might. But one way or the other, you're right that this could have an effect.....on everything, not just games.
I will play F2P games only if I have no other choice. However, if I can't afford P2P games, then I probably also cannot afford the internet, so....you know.....would make it hard to play anything.
The funny thing is, when I speak to most of my friends, who all play games, the "bad" economy hasn't really hit any of them. I feel for those it has hit, but lets face it, video games are a complete and utter luxury and by the way the business is booming, it makes you wonder. Chances are, if you're reading this site.. you have the extra money for the internet and to spend on games. It don't think the economy will affect the video game market as much as you think.
I will continue to pay for games that warrant a payment. If I'm having fun, you gleefully get my coin. If the games sucks, I won't play it even if it's free.
It is not so much that the economy has not touched them but, it is cheaper in most cases to stay home and play on the internet. I live in a small town which is near a slightly larger town where the theater is, tickets to see a movie are around $15 each so if i take my wife that is $30, add $10 for drinks and popcorn already I have paid more then I would on a manthly sub, now being it is 25 miles to this location it is going to cost me say $5 to go there and back in gas I am up to $45 for 1 chunk of 2 hour entertainment. That is in my small town let alone a larger city like LA or Chicago.
Assuming I do this once per week that works out to $180 per month vs $30 for 2 game subscriptions.
If your looking at it from the perspective of an adult who has to earn there money or from the perspective of a young person that needs to ask there parents for money to go out and or play games, either way it works out cheaper to stay home.
I am not debating the health of such things just the cost.
First, the state of the US or global economy is almost a non-factor in the original argument... ('What will you do when F2P replace P2P?'). MMO's are a subset of recreation and recreation is funded with disposable income. Even the poorset people require recreation as a 'non-basic' need. So, while spending habits may change and the market size may contract in economic armagedeon, if there was a large enough 'premium' population to support UO in 1997... there will always be plenty of people to support 'premium' gaming in the concievable future. While I know production costs are skyrocketing at the major developement studios, there is still room for a AAA title like Perpetuum... developed on a shoestring budget by an Indy house in Budapest. It's do-able.
Second, the OP's question begins with a foregone assumption that AAA P2P will be replaced by F2P... IT WILL NOT HAPPEN... They largely cater to different markets and while corporations chase margins, consumers chase value. The gaming market is larger then it's ever been before and still growing at a ferocious pace... In general the F2P model apeals to those seeking a more casual gaming experience, the more 'hardcore' P2P gamers have not gone anywhere it only seems that way since the market share they represent has been diluted.
Like the explosion of reality TV, F2P games have forever upset the balance of the supply/demand mechanics with the kind of low cost, high margin cr@p in a box that providers love. However, consumers will still put their money where they find value and players like myself will never find much value in the F2P model. So, AAA P2P will continue though the market may become less saturated... but thats been coming for a long time.
Finally consider that F2P gamers are a much more fickle bunch, generally dividing their time between multiple games while constantly cyceling new games in and out, whats HOT today is gone tomorrow. Conversely, P2P have a lower initial churn rate and those that stay past the 3mo mark will typically be there for an additional 12mo... In others words they generate the kind of stable long term revenue streams that makes corporate mouths water.
some / most "if everyone followed the trend" AAA mmo's would follow down that road as well with cash shops and pay to win ..so id just play a AAA mmo that would be f2p
That just means I will have more free time to work on my own game...
P2P, F2P or P2W?
F2P makes a lot of sense as long as it doesn't cross the "pay to win" line.
A lot of people seem to get offended by a game making money when it give you a choice as to whether to pay or not; but seem fine when a game forces you to pay to play - very strange...
Well considering all of the recent subrciption-convert-freetoplay still retains a subscription method as a premium service. I don't consider subscription method ever 'died' or even declined, but instead free to play just rose to prominence. Sure more and more players are switching to the free to play method, but subscription is still always there, they never declined, more like overshadowed. Ultimately, I think most games will offer a hybrid model, or a few exceptions to B2P (if GW2 become really finanically successful), so Subscription never will actually die as long as MMO as genre is still alive, but instead will be sharing its customers with F2P.
I have always said so, instead of a F2P future, I think Hybrid is definitely the way to go with payment methods. MMOG requires a large playerbase, much larger than single player games, and people always want more ingame mechanics so that it suits a larger variety of players, so why should payment method follow the same principle? In order to attract a larger audience, payment method need to be more flexible, just like in real life, you can pay with credit card, up front cash or eftpos. In MMO you can either sub or use microtranscation, lifetime sub, or even B2P, all methods together for one game.
MMO needs to be flexible in order to attract more customers, payment methods is one of them.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW? As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
As an aside, I have no idea why the USA would be in real trouble. All they actually fight is their own definition of when they have too many debt.
For all I know, they will just make even more debt.
If they really would want to get rid of their debts, taxing their rich would easily solve their problems. They dont. So they cant be in real trouble.
Then again, the greek are in real trouble and they still hardly tax their rich at all.
Guess the real reason is stupidity, then.
What is the stupid thing ? Imagine a rich guy on a lonely island. There would be zero differences to a poor guy on a lonely island. In fact, its impossible to become rich on the lonely island in the first place. Nobody really does work worth millions or billions of dollars or euros. So, in order to be rich, you need to trick other people into giving you wealth. Therefore the rich profit from having a community far more than the poor and therefore high taxes for the rich are thus always completely justified.
(In fact most of the REALLY rich people today have been born rich and didnt need to ever work for it)
Wow and Rift will hopefully never been f2p. This duo is all I need to cover my gaming needs. So far as I'm always looking for new good alternatives ... but so far also all my efforts were .... snif ... :-) And, if somebody will like to ask why I'm looking for alternatives if im happy with Wow and Rift answer is easy: even if i love pizza ... I can not eat pizza 5 times per day 365 days per year ... so is obvious I'm looking for other loving meals to exchange from time to time. At this time playing Rift and loving it really a lot ... awesome game, impressive package (not that there is no need for evolution), .... and all this bug free.
Comments
To me it's quality, and the existence of a cash shop. I will not play a game with a cash shop that sells in game items with stats, or xp potions.
I guess I'll carry on doing what I've been doing for the last year, which is play EVE for free.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
I was reading through the comments to this thread and happened upon the one above. Now, this is not a slam at the person that made the comment but the statement above is illogical. First, you assume too much. The dollar is going to crash; infaltion is so high we can barely pay for food and such; and most people will be unemployeed. How does making a game "f2p" make it workable? The so-called "f2p" model is based upon the idea that companies draw in enough people because of the "free" part. They then DEPEND upon people spending REAL money in order to make a profit to keep the GAME COMPANY afloat (not the game). IF there are not enough people spending REAL money, the game and possibly the game comany suffer and go away. The "free" part does not make any money. It does not cause more content to added or old content to be bug-fixed. It is the money from those spending real money that does that. So, if the economy is in such dire shape, how does that bode any better for a so-called f2p MMO model?
F2P is a great short term thing for those that don't want to spend real money. Problem is, that if everyone did not spend money there would no longer be any F2P games.....something to ponder.
Let's party like it is 1863!
To the original poster; I will just find a game that I enjoy playing with some friends and play it. I don't really care if I have to pay or not. If it's a good game, I'll play.
After playing mmo's for over 10 years now, I have learned, it's not the game, it's with whom you play. As long as I have some good buddies to cut up with over Vent/TS, I'm good.
Alarm bells? I'll have alarm bells when it looks like my company may go under. IF there may be a time where none of the games availabe are worth my time...I'll just do something else.
You should feel reasonably secure, however. If there are really people out there that are wringing their hands at the thought of not having a p2p game to throw their money at, someone, somewhere will keep making those games.
This question is irrelevant because solid AAA MMOs wont vanish nor turn F2P.
Oh, and I dont oppose F2P. It should just happen on different servers. As long as that criterion is met, I'm perfectly cool with it.
Agreed, there is a large enough market for P2P games and so they will continue to be made.
And if it would actually stop ... I would stop playing.
the cream of the crop will always be P2P, while the chaff/crap and everything else will be F2P and I have no issue with this at all, most of the games that are F2P now are games that simply would not have made their developers any money as a P2P game. they were never good enough.
Err ... GW wasnt AAA. It was a rather simplistic game with niceish graphics. Maybe there was a lot of content, I dunno, I didnt played very long before I was bored out of my mind. But the rulesystem was simple (nice, yes, but simple) and crafting could only be called primitive.
If more game companies would use that model, a lot of them would fail for obvious reasons. To succeed at this model, you need a constant stream of new sales - of people who buy the game, but dont actually play the game.
That's what I was going to say. There are plenty of great old titles to fall back on.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Sleep.
I doubt that most of the posters on this site know what you're talking about. Probably why no one commented on it. Oh sure....some might. But one way or the other, you're right that this could have an effect.....on everything, not just games.
I will play F2P games only if I have no other choice. However, if I can't afford P2P games, then I probably also cannot afford the internet, so....you know.....would make it hard to play anything.
President of The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club
Deal was signed last evening, crisis averted, next on the agenda, meteor strike in 2029....
If the US economy is in shambles, where does that leave most of the rest of the world?
But good point, F2P games are great for the unemployed...
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
The funny thing is, when I speak to most of my friends, who all play games, the "bad" economy hasn't really hit any of them. I feel for those it has hit, but lets face it, video games are a complete and utter luxury and by the way the business is booming, it makes you wonder. Chances are, if you're reading this site.. you have the extra money for the internet and to spend on games. It don't think the economy will affect the video game market as much as you think.
I will continue to pay for games that warrant a payment. If I'm having fun, you gleefully get my coin. If the games sucks, I won't play it even if it's free.
I've played both types of games but prefer the p2p types. F2P really isn't all that free if you want to play with all the bells and whistles or high end gear. I see F2P as an extended trail to see if investing in the game is worth while. I don't have any problem with games such as STO having a P2P with a cash shop as long as you can get the stat items in game or it just sells fluff stuff.
I really don't see P2P type games going under as the author here thinks, but if they did I would look for a F2P game such as Uncharted Waters to play, and pay to play (cash shop) that game properly!
I hope they will not take over completly but, sadly I see a great many people that think F2P is all that wonderful they are simpley not thinking about where that model will take them.
Company's make mmo's or fps or what ever it is to make money, that is the bottom line. Cash stores give them a pretty much limitless way to make money. All they have to do is put out a new set of gear that is better even if just a little better then the last set of gear and these people that think that they are saving money because they pay once to have gear permenatly are not thinking about 1. how often do you have to pay that big chunck ? 2. how much does each chunk cost you ?
Example, you start a new F2P it cost you nothing, the first thing you have to do is get gear, so you drop $90 to get this gear you need, you pay nothing for 6 months at this point they release a new gear pack, the new stuff hits harder, shots further and deflects more damage then your old stuff so you drop another $90. Guess what ? you just spent $180 for a year of play time, how much does $15 x 12 for a year to play cost you? $180 you have saved nothing.
The numbers i stated are generous the reality is that in games such as combat arms, battle field play 4 free the cost to upgrade your gear is closer to about $120 each time, so over a year you spend $240ish to stay uber.
There are a few games as you mentioned that are on a free to play model that were originally designed for a sub plan, These games are testing the water IMO. They are tryng to see just how many people they can get to buy things from there store and I promise you they have the corperate bean counters watching this closly, if a lot of people show the tendancy to pay for dungeons to get that uber gear and they come up with the fact that they make more that way then they do by charging subs then that is the way they are going to go.
People need to get it through there heads, these company's are running a business. They are not going to go to a model that makes them less money. They can't. Here is why, most company's have investors, the investors could care less about a quality game with good graphics, all the investors want to see is a reacuring increase in there investment. When the investors stop gaining money on there investment they sell and look for something else to put there money in that will make them money. When they sell, a share of the company's profits go to that person if they can not find someone else to purchase those shares the company has to buy them back. If enough investors sell there shares at the same time the company will show as losing money, now they have a hard time getting more investors because they are losing money and no one wants to lose on there investment.
Now look at the fact that any game company has money invested in a game before any player ever sets foot in it, or do you really believe that devolpers and story tellers work for free ? The company has to show they can make that money back and make a profit to apeal to investors, the more they can show they can make the higher the apeal, the more likely they are to get investors. On a free to play system they can not yet accurately predict how many people will be willing to pay for stuff hence they are testing the waters on titles such as LOTRO which by now they have more then likely made there money from and the risk is small in seeing how this pans out.
In many cases all of the above and the cost that will be incured to operate the server including owning vs renting, leasing a building to house said servers or at very least to house the support staff, all plays a role in how much you pay. That is really business 101. What I have typed here, as long winded as it looks is really just the tip of the iceburg and is far from a complete or detailed plan they would need to have just to think about making a game. If you think for one second they are not weighing the cost against the profit then you just are not thinking it through.
It is not so much that the economy has not touched them but, it is cheaper in most cases to stay home and play on the internet. I live in a small town which is near a slightly larger town where the theater is, tickets to see a movie are around $15 each so if i take my wife that is $30, add $10 for drinks and popcorn already I have paid more then I would on a manthly sub, now being it is 25 miles to this location it is going to cost me say $5 to go there and back in gas I am up to $45 for 1 chunk of 2 hour entertainment. That is in my small town let alone a larger city like LA or Chicago.
Assuming I do this once per week that works out to $180 per month vs $30 for 2 game subscriptions.
If your looking at it from the perspective of an adult who has to earn there money or from the perspective of a young person that needs to ask there parents for money to go out and or play games, either way it works out cheaper to stay home.
I am not debating the health of such things just the cost.
First, the state of the US or global economy is almost a non-factor in the original argument... ('What will you do when F2P replace P2P?'). MMO's are a subset of recreation and recreation is funded with disposable income. Even the poorset people require recreation as a 'non-basic' need. So, while spending habits may change and the market size may contract in economic armagedeon, if there was a large enough 'premium' population to support UO in 1997... there will always be plenty of people to support 'premium' gaming in the concievable future. While I know production costs are skyrocketing at the major developement studios, there is still room for a AAA title like Perpetuum... developed on a shoestring budget by an Indy house in Budapest. It's do-able.
Second, the OP's question begins with a foregone assumption that AAA P2P will be replaced by F2P... IT WILL NOT HAPPEN... They largely cater to different markets and while corporations chase margins, consumers chase value. The gaming market is larger then it's ever been before and still growing at a ferocious pace... In general the F2P model apeals to those seeking a more casual gaming experience, the more 'hardcore' P2P gamers have not gone anywhere it only seems that way since the market share they represent has been diluted.
Like the explosion of reality TV, F2P games have forever upset the balance of the supply/demand mechanics with the kind of low cost, high margin cr@p in a box that providers love. However, consumers will still put their money where they find value and players like myself will never find much value in the F2P model. So, AAA P2P will continue though the market may become less saturated... but thats been coming for a long time.
Finally consider that F2P gamers are a much more fickle bunch, generally dividing their time between multiple games while constantly cyceling new games in and out, whats HOT today is gone tomorrow. Conversely, P2P have a lower initial churn rate and those that stay past the 3mo mark will typically be there for an additional 12mo... In others words they generate the kind of stable long term revenue streams that makes corporate mouths water.
That just means I will have more free time to work on my own game...
DarkSpace Developer - Play DarkSpace - Play For Free!
Medusa Engine SDK - Free MMO Game Engine
Hampton Roads/East Coast Video Gamers Association
some / most "if everyone followed the trend" AAA mmo's would follow down that road as well with cash shops and pay to win ..so id just play a AAA mmo that would be f2p
"So...what will you do when the current crop of AAA MMOs are gone and only the real F2P games are left?"
The same thing we do every night, Pinky -- try to take over the world.
"Gypsies, tramps, and thieves, we were called by the Admin of the site . . . "
P2P, F2P or P2W?
F2P makes a lot of sense as long as it doesn't cross the "pay to win" line.
A lot of people seem to get offended by a game making money when it give you a choice as to whether to pay or not; but seem fine when a game forces you to pay to play - very strange...
Im sure that f2p games will be gone before AAA rated games.
~i'd rather be forgotten than remembered for giving in~
Well considering all of the recent subrciption-convert-freetoplay still retains a subscription method as a premium service. I don't consider subscription method ever 'died' or even declined, but instead free to play just rose to prominence. Sure more and more players are switching to the free to play method, but subscription is still always there, they never declined, more like overshadowed. Ultimately, I think most games will offer a hybrid model, or a few exceptions to B2P (if GW2 become really finanically successful), so Subscription never will actually die as long as MMO as genre is still alive, but instead will be sharing its customers with F2P.
I have always said so, instead of a F2P future, I think Hybrid is definitely the way to go with payment methods. MMOG requires a large playerbase, much larger than single player games, and people always want more ingame mechanics so that it suits a larger variety of players, so why should payment method follow the same principle? In order to attract a larger audience, payment method need to be more flexible, just like in real life, you can pay with credit card, up front cash or eftpos. In MMO you can either sub or use microtranscation, lifetime sub, or even B2P, all methods together for one game.
MMO needs to be flexible in order to attract more customers, payment methods is one of them.
How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.
As an aside, I have no idea why the USA would be in real trouble. All they actually fight is their own definition of when they have too many debt.
For all I know, they will just make even more debt.
If they really would want to get rid of their debts, taxing their rich would easily solve their problems. They dont. So they cant be in real trouble.
Then again, the greek are in real trouble and they still hardly tax their rich at all.
Guess the real reason is stupidity, then.
What is the stupid thing ? Imagine a rich guy on a lonely island. There would be zero differences to a poor guy on a lonely island. In fact, its impossible to become rich on the lonely island in the first place. Nobody really does work worth millions or billions of dollars or euros. So, in order to be rich, you need to trick other people into giving you wealth. Therefore the rich profit from having a community far more than the poor and therefore high taxes for the rich are thus always completely justified.
(In fact most of the REALLY rich people today have been born rich and didnt need to ever work for it)
Wow and Rift will hopefully never been f2p. This duo is all I need to cover my gaming needs. So far as I'm always looking for new good alternatives ... but so far also all my efforts were .... snif ... :-) And, if somebody will like to ask why I'm looking for alternatives if im happy with Wow and Rift answer is easy: even if i love pizza ... I can not eat pizza 5 times per day 365 days per year ... so is obvious I'm looking for other loving meals to exchange from time to time. At this time playing Rift and loving it really a lot ... awesome game, impressive package (not that there is no need for evolution), .... and all this bug free.