The MMORPG industry has changed into the MMO industry.
But the luminaries & oldschoolers who built this genre of gaming are now in the 30's & 40's. Brad McQuaid, John Smedley, Lord British and any of the people who played Meridain, Ultima & EQ. We are all adults now, all earning income & have homes, boats, sportscars, Jet ski's, etc..
So who exactly is asking for, & seeking out Free to Play games..?
It is children and adolescent youth from ages 12 ~22^ who have limited, or no source of income.
No.
I played MUDS and my first MMORPG was NWNO back in 1991.
Some people, clearly not all of us, get smarter as we grow older and no longer wish to be fleeced by corporations that have clung to a pay system that was created during a time of high bandwidth and server costs, something that is a fraction of the cost today.
Enjoy your life where you have to place everyone into a small box formed to fit your narrow view of the world. Anything to help you justify being bent over, more than likely done to help you focus on something other than the pain.
F2P is a deceptive business model which the game maker can change whenever they want. It's a way to get about 3x more income per player compared to traditional subscriptions. Once consumer awareness of this model increases, I expect the F2P system to diminish.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon. In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
They made f2p model buisness because if it is wellmade it can sell 30-50% more than a subscription only. Besides it´s a good way for players to try it out but also a very good way to hook a player into the game, either from buying in the cash shop or subscription. Strange enough cash shop sells better in the longer run TODAY and has becomed a trend.
Free to play is all about the cash shop to unlock features, but also offers a subscription most of time. And you are free to choose how to spend your money. Some buy from either cash shop or a subscription, even both sometimes. On some games it works like in Rift, some has been a failure like Swtor.
But another reason why they tend to go free to play rather than premium as you say. They struggle to get high playerbase and that´s why company after company have gone free to play to fight for us to play their game
Some makes free to play to squeeze that last juice out of the game to earn as much cash as possible. Usually those kind of cash shops fails. But that´s my opinion.
SWTOR's cash shop saved the game and isn't a failure , just look at EA's last quarter meeting / call. I thought RIFT's cash shop sold end-game raiding equipment, not sure if you mean success in making money or success in what the shops have in them. Rift's shop selling such items isn't good at all and SWTOR's cash shop makes them lot's of money.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing. "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13 The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
But, do you consider that simply "playing the game" is a the same thing , than wanting to sink your heart into a game your never imagined possible..?
Or more simply put; When you play these F2P games, do you play them with the same passion you have done with your subscription based games..?
I find the lack of community, no-matter-what, just makes it a video game. (<-- GW2.. I have 2 collector's editions too)
.
To answer that, I would ask "why would anyone play a game where they wouldn't want to 'sink their heart'"
And the answer to that is "some people are built so that they can "sink their heart" into anything they do (my type of person) and others are built that they can compartmentalize their experiences and don't find it necessary to "sink their heart" into a game.
Agree^
But I would argue that those^ people are not enthusiast & hobbyist of MMORPG's, either...
Or, was that your point... he he
I think they still "could be". They would just manifest their interest in a different way.
There are people who love trying every game but have no real need to "dig in" for more than a few months until the next big thing.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
So who exactly is asking for, & seeking out Free to Play games..?
It is children and adolescent youth from ages 12 ~22^ who have limited, or no source of income.
Absolute rubbish. Where did you pull that particular "fact" out from? I'm an OLD gamer (almost 60 and been playing computer games for about 30 years) and free games are ideal because, in all honestly, there isn't a pay-to-play game out there that I think is worth paying for. I've subscribed to many, got bored at the shallowness and repetitiveness and cancelled the sub and moved on to another one.
Eventually I realised the futility of throwing money at the overpriced crap they churn out, shrugged my shoulders and figured if a game costs nothing at least I haven't lost anything. If there was a game worth subscribing to I'd be glad to do so, but I reckon I'll be 90 before that will happen!
F2P is a deceptive business model which the game maker can change whenever they want. It's a way to get about 3x more income per player compared to traditional subscriptions. Once consumer awareness of this model increases, I expect the F2P system to diminish.
Flip it.
Subscriptions are a deceptive business model which the game maker can change whenever they want(just look at how many of them went B2P/F2P after release). It's a way to get about 3x more income per player (for a really bad game that will soon be F2P) compared to traditional F2Ps. Once consumer awareness of this model CONTINUES to increase, I expect the Sub system to end...because its already been decreasing.
Stop acting like F2P is new, the first F2P game was back in 1996...you are just proving you don't know a thing about the genre.
1. Swtor cash shop may have saved the game, but yet still a lot of people claims it to be unbalanced with overrated prices on purchases. Maybe that have been changed I can not tell so you could be right about that.
2. Rift shop do not sell end raiding gear, but dungeon gear. Cannot buy the best gear in the game, it has to be earned and even if you bought the dungeon gear it would take very long time to grind get the raiding gear. Because you will end up get dungeon gear way before the raiding because its cheaper and you get 400 slayer marks. Raiding gear you only earn 50 frozen eclipse and the gear is up to 4x more expensive and the weapons cost a farm. The upgrading cost a farm too.
3. They recently announced Rift as successful here on mmorpg.com
Great, so you do agree that a high-quality, adult focused premium game subscription game, with about 500k strong (and would likely grow as "others" tried their feet in challenging content) to at least one million strong, would be a viable business model for a developer...?
(is that^ actually one sentence.. lol)
yes!
However, I also think that depending on price it would also speak to how many of these games could exist in the marketplace and thrive.
Well, what if.. SOE announced that EQn was going to a premium subscription (& gameplay dialed in for it)...?
Leaving millions wanting to play, but can't..? (or won't..?)
I say BS, and that these people who cannot control themselves in Best Buy, will have no problem coughing up $240/year ($20/month) on the CC to finally play thee game, they were told they could never play...
How did we do it when we were in our twenties, but these kids can't? Free ice cream this way--->
I think there is at least 2 million people in the market place today, that will pay $20/month (Or $240/year) for a premium, long term roleplaying game.
More, once the idea of roleplaying catches on... (think EVE)
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Free to play doesn't mean low quality or casual, it's a simple business model.
Then you say F2P is sought out by younger gamers who are spending their parent's money, while the real money is with the adults with discretionary gaming income (not sure why you cited gasoline expenditures in your op - are you suggesting that the only reason you leave your house is because you don't have a sub-based MMO keeping you there?).
Your fact of older people have more wealth is partially true, but is really a lopsided "fact". It fails to account for the increased costs of adulthood and the fact that average personal debt in the US is around $15k. That would tell you that people actually don't have hundreds to spend on games. While I'm not claiming that their costs of living are what's sucking up the money, I'm just pointing out that you can't count adults as having more money without counting their spending.
Teenagers/children have little responsibility (please, I don't need some teenager posting about how they support their cancer ridden mother - you're an exception not the rule, refrain from replying) and any money given to them is generally discretionary and written off by the parents. I just think you have a very weak point and it has little bearing on MMO's. Not to mention, most of us who played MMO's back in the day were actually teenagers at the time so . . .
"There are 500k of us, then our kids and a few million more that would slowly latch on to a premium oldschool game. One Million, all paying $20/month is better than baby-sitting 18 million WoW'tardz.."
What? Where are your numbers from and why is $20 considered "premium?" Then you go on to add that a few million more would just show up. And lastly you say that is better than baby sitting 18 million people. Um, no, to a business it's not better. In fact 500k vs 18 million is horrible. If you're suggesting that a small niche based game could attract 500k and possibly more, I wouldn't say no, but I would say, "Show me the game."
You're putting the cart waaaay before the horse here, you're talking numbers as all old school (read: older) gamers want the exact same thing. You're speaking for an entire community because you asked some buddies while watching TV together. Forgive me if I'm not inspired by your less than rigorous methods.
I also don't understand why a casual gamer wouldn't want a "premium" game either? If WoW is full of casual kiddie-tardz and it costs $15 a month - what exactly is the barrier to entry for this premium game? +$5/month? Your dividing line rests on $5 more per month? The number isn't completely arbitrary because the higher you crank it, the less of a chance you have of attracting that mythical 500k+ playerbase.
"Coincidentally, what is stereo-typing & over-generalizing other than a demographic ..?"
Well, neither are a demographic.
A demographic is identifying a population's (or portion of a population) structure. As in, 10 people in this thread are under 18, there are 20 people in this thread. 50% of this thread is below 18. Demographics are typically based on facts and acquiring the best data to determine those results.
Generalization is a extrapolating information from a smaller case. The second and third posters in this thread are 18, therefore most of the posters in this thread are 18. Likely to be very wrong.
A stereo-type is a commonly held idea of a group. All 18 year olds want to do is get drunk. Again, likely wrong.
So unless you have data showing X% of adult old school gamers want what you're saying they want, it's pretty much just you and a handful of guys making noise.
Look, the reason what you want isn't out there is because the support for this project currently doesn't appear to exist in the market. Camelot Unchained is a prime example is re-birthing (and in some cases, improving upon an old school title). If there were so many people chomping at the bits for something like this you would think it would have found more than 14,873 backers on kickstarter. That's a far cry from 500k.
Now, they hit their funding goal and I'm sure more than that ~15k are going to play it, but it's about the bigger picture. You say 500k and possibly growing from there. Why? Why is it possible? Where are these people going to come from? Are they all just hanging around buying gasoline waiting for an old school premium game to spend their money on?
This imaginary game doesn't just have the challenge of attracting 500k people, it has the specific challenge of attracting 500k people who want the same thing.
From my best attempts at finding a number (aka, multiple sites, not just wiki) EQ1 was somewhere in the range of 450k-500k at it's peak. You would have to attract 100% of those players to just make your estimate. This is assuming all those people still play MMO's.
Great, so you do agree that a high-quality, adult focused premium game subscription game, with about 500k strong (and would likely grow as "others" tried their feet in challenging content) to at least one million strong, would be a viable business model for a developer...?
(is that^ actually one sentence.. lol)
yes!
However, I also think that depending on price it would also speak to how many of these games could exist in the marketplace and thrive.
Well, what if.. SOE announced that EQn was going to a premium subscription (& gameplay dialed in for it)...?
Leaving millions wanting to play, but can't..? (or won't..?)
I say BS, and that these people who cannot control themselves in Best Buy, will have no problem coughing up $240/year ($20/month) on the CC to finally play thee game, they were told they could never play...
How did we do it when we were in our twenties, but these kids can't? Free ice cream this way--->
I think there is at least 2 million people in the market place today, that will pay $20/month (Or $240/year) for a premium, long term roleplaying game.
More, once the idea of roleplaying catches on... (think EVE)
Likley there is more than 2 million people who will pay for a for a premium, long term roleplaying game.
That isn't the real question though. The question is how many of those 2 million people who would pay for a premium, long term role playing game, pay for THAT PARTICULAR premium long term role playing game.
I'll use me as an example.
I'm currently subbed to EQ (again). I'm willing to pay for a game I am entertained with.
However if that game has ffa pvp, I am less likely to pay for that. Every decision the devs make reduce the available pool of people who will pay for a game like that. After all the decisions are done how many people total in the pool would pay for a game like that, then expect only 10-20% of them to actually pay it (asking for 100% is totally unrealistic).
So once again the real question is how many of those total pool of people who would pay for a premium, long term role playing game, would pay for THAT PARTICULAR premium long term role playing game. and then stay with it.
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
So once again the real question is how many of those total pool of people who would pay for a premium, long term role playing game, would pay for THAT PARTICULAR premium long term role playing game. and then stay with it.
And I think there is validity in that.
At the moment I am subbed to two games, Vanguard and LOTRO and I'm thinking of dropping the LOTRO because their pve "end game" is abyssmal. Essentially a set of dailies to rebuild a town and you get tokens that, after about 2 months, you get to turn in for better gear.
I might as well go f2p for that game.
give me a game that gives me what I want and I'll gladly pay double to play it.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
There are a quite a few dynamics at play with why games are F2P.
You start off with WoW. WoW has lead to repeat content style that's generally shallower and less content then the original. Thus these games fail to hold subs because of been there done that better syndrome.
You then go on apparent polling and taking games down a path of least resistance. Developers call this ease and accessibility. Its not so much on a philosophical(well it is in away) decision for the betterment of the game. It's simply because we individually want features that make the game easier. Even though us players and sadly even developers in many ways don't understand how the choices effect the game as a whole. These games have become too casualized to support functioning communities or challenge players or give time sinks or hooks. Thus two fold the newer breed MMORPG lacks what's need to hold subs.
You also have many developers taking the story themepark single player content style route. Combine this with causal difficulty you have players "beating" MMORPG's in a weeks. Another killer for subs.
F2P model is the saving grace for many MMORPG's because many players simply won't spend a dime to play these games long term. These games are sprinters running marathons. But switching to F2P gets player who will spend lots in cash shops with near unlimited ceiling for spending vs. 15 max for a sub game. You also pull in players to your game that wouldn't play before since it's free.
So, it's not just because kiddies are wanting to play free games because a large number still sub. The reason is that many games that have come out simply are not designed to be able to support long term subscriptions. I am not sure the developers know this or not but it seems pretty damn obvious at this point.
There are a quite a few dynamics at play with why games are F2P.
You start off with WoW. WoW has lead to repeat content style that's generally shallower and less content then the original. Thus these games fail to hold subs because of been there done that better syndrome.
You then go...
and factor in that F2P games have been around since 1996 and even B2P with GW1 being out before WoW...then suddenly your entire post has no meaning other than showing you know little about the genre as a whole.
Free to play doesn't mean low quality or casual, it's a simple business model.
Then you say F2P is sought out by younger gamers who are spending their parent's money, while the real money is with the adults with discretionary gaming income (not sure why you cited gasoline expenditures in your op - are you suggesting that the only reason you leave your house is because you don't have a sub-based MMO keeping you there?).
Your fact of older people have more wealth is partially true, but is really a lopsided "fact". It fails to account for the increased costs of adulthood and the fact that average personal debt in the US is around $15k. That would tell you that people actually don't have hundreds to spend on games. While I'm not claiming that their costs of living are what's sucking up the money, I'm just pointing out that you can't count adults as having more money without counting their spending.
Teenagers/children have little responsibility (please, I don't need some teenager posting about how they support their cancer ridden mother - you're an exception not the rule, refrain from replying) and any money given to them is generally discretionary and written off by the parents. I just think you have a very weak point and it has little bearing on MMO's. Not to mention, most of us who played MMO's back in the day were actually teenagers at the time so . . .
"There are 500k of us, then our kids and a few million more that would slowly latch on to a premium oldschool game. One Million, all paying $20/month is better than baby-sitting 18 million WoW'tardz.."
What? Where are your numbers from and why is $20 considered "premium?" Then you go on to add that a few million more would just show up. And lastly you say that is better than baby sitting 18 million people. Um, no, to a business it's not better. In fact 500k vs 18 million is horrible. If you're suggesting that a small niche based game could attract 500k and possibly more, I wouldn't say no, but I would say, "Show me the game."
You're putting the cart waaaay before the horse here, you're talking numbers as all old school (read: older) gamers want the exact same thing. You're speaking for an entire community because you asked some buddies while watching TV together. Forgive me if I'm not inspired by your less than rigorous methods.
I also don't understand why a casual gamer wouldn't want a "premium" game either? If WoW is full of casual kiddie-tardz and it costs $15 a month - what exactly is the barrier to entry for this premium game? +$5/month? Your dividing line rests on $5 more per month? The number isn't completely arbitrary because the higher you crank it, the less of a chance you have of attracting that mythical 500k+ playerbase.
"Coincidentally, what is stereo-typing & over-generalizing other than a demographic ..?"
Well, neither are a demographic.
A demographic is identifying a population's (or portion of a population) structure. As in, 10 people in this thread are under 18, there are 20 people in this thread. 50% of this thread is below 18. Demographics are typically based on facts and acquiring the best data to determine those results.
Generalization is a extrapolating information from a smaller case. The second and third posters in this thread are 18, therefore most of the posters in this thread are 18. Likely to be very wrong.
A stereo-type is a commonly held idea of a group. All 18 year olds want to do is get drunk. Again, likely wrong.
So unless you have data showing X% of adult old school gamers want what you're saying they want, it's pretty much just you and a handful of guys making noise.
Look, the reason what you want isn't out there is because the support for this project currently doesn't appear to exist in the market. Camelot Unchained is a prime example is re-birthing (and in some cases, improving upon an old school title). If there were so many people chomping at the bits for something like this you would think it would have found more than 14,873 backers on kickstarter. That's a far cry from 500k.
Now, they hit their funding goal and I'm sure more than that ~15k are going to play it, but it's about the bigger picture. You say 500k and possibly growing from there. Why? Why is it possible? Where are these people going to come from? Are they all just hanging around buying gasoline waiting for an old school premium game to spend their money on?
This imaginary game doesn't just have the challenge of attracting 500k people, it has the specific challenge of attracting 500k people who want the same thing.
From my best attempts at finding a number (aka, multiple sites, not just wiki) EQ1 was somewhere in the range of 450k-500k at it's peak. You would have to attract 100% of those players to just make your estimate. This is assuming all those people still play MMO's.
Your age...?
I've been playing d&d and muds since the fido-net days. If you think all of us who read terry brooks, tolkien novels, & spent all those years roleplaying.. Don't want a high-quality game..? Or can't afford it.
Who are you trying to kid? Ask urself this.. why are you rallying so hard against a premium subscription game.?
Why again are you playing your free game 20h week? Free clearly lacks quality that a 15 mmo veteran demands.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
The MMORPG industry has changed into the MMO industry.
But the luminaries & oldschoolers who built this genre of gaming are now in the 30's & 40's. Brad McQuaid, John Smedley, Lord British and any of the people who played Meridain, Ultima & EQ. We are all adults now, all earning income & have homes, boats, sportscars, Jet ski's, etc..
So who exactly is asking for, & seeking out Free to Play games..?
It is children and adolescent youth from ages 12 ~22^ who have limited, or no source of income.
Just had my NFL draft this past weekend and looked around the room at many of my EQ guildmates and wondered why they would want a free game to play... So I asked. The response was unanimous "No!" They don't want to be troubled with "free realms" community & mentality. (easy is not challenging)
So why are the oldschooler being under sold..? An adult can easily throw $240 ~ $500/year (at a game) if we want... yet most Dev's are making games for children and try to nickel & dime their parents. Instead of going strait to the revenue source.
Why not go strait to the revenues and make a premium game... and charge a premium..?
FWIW: I am 43 and spent $155 on 4 tanks of gasoline this holiday weekend. (<---- Why don't developers want any of that money..? ^^)
The barrier to entry for p2p games isn't one that's really going to keep out the "kids." My son has been playing WoW and EvE (under my supervision) for years now. He pays for it from his allowance which he gets for daily chores. 15 dollars a month really isn't expensive enough to keep out kids if they want to play. Especially when you can buy the game time cards at nearly every department/electronics store in the world.
There are a quite a few dynamics at play with why games are F2P.
You start off with WoW. WoW has lead to repeat content style that's generally shallower and less content then the original. Thus these games fail to hold subs because of been there done that better syndrome.
You then go...
and factor in that F2P games have been around since 1996 and even B2P with GW1 being out before WoW...then suddenly your entire post has no meaning other than showing you know little about the genre as a whole.
Lol, yes I know so little about the genre because you have assumptions? I am talking about the trends in mainstream AAA or even I guess AA MMORPG's. Why most games you see come out subscription based and have to switch.
If you're making this about age, then I can only reply the same way I do when someone tries to tell me there was less crime back in their day, than there is today.
Your observations are based on anecdotal data. Personal experience, not empirical data. If bandwidth hadn't been a premium back in the late 90s, you would have played free online games as well and you wouldn't be so afraid of them today.
Your children will grow up in a world where online bandwidth fees will (hopefully) become subsumed into the background.
You think you are special for paying for something? Weren't yours and the generations before yours the ones that had free television? The 'freeloaders' you denigrate have lived their whole lives only paying for it. The extra load has to come from somewhere, the backs of the people are not infinitely broad. There will come that last straw if things continue in this direction.
And for the record... I'm older than you.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire: Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
I've been playing d&d and muds since the fido-net days. If you think all of us who read terry brooks, tolkien novels, & spent all those years roleplaying.. Don't want a high-quality game..? Or can't afford it.
Who are you trying to kid? Ask urself this.. why are you rallying so hard against a premium subscription game.?
Why again are you playing your free game 20h week? Free clearly lacks quality that a 15 mmo veteran demands.
The reason they rally so hard against it Phelcher, is they see a great game, a gane that coule probably give them something that the game they're playing for free can't give them, which makes them unhappy but they can't grasp or maybe they don't want to grasp the fact that a good product is something that is normally not free. they've been fed crap for so long for free that they have no concept of worth of something good.
When they see us enjoying something they can't they get angry, which is why you see them act like they do, I've worked most of my life, I know nothing good is free, one day they might realize this instead of relying on a few people to subsidize thier game for them like in the F2P games where they're just food for the whales.
They're always discontent because they're treated like second class citizens by the developers, and they should be because they're parasites living off someone elses hard work, its why they'll never be happy, because the people that pay remind them of what they really are every time to the game community.
The MMORPG industry has changed into the MMO industry.
But the luminaries & oldschoolers who built this genre of gaming are now in the 30's & 40's. Brad McQuaid, John Smedley, Lord British and any of the people who played Meridain, Ultima & EQ. We are all adults now, all earning income & have homes, boats, sportscars, Jet ski's, etc..
So who exactly is asking for, & seeking out Free to Play games..?
It is children and adolescent youth from ages 12 ~22^ who have limited, or no source of income.
Just had my NFL draft this past weekend and looked around the room at many of my EQ guildmates and wondered why they would want a free game to play... So I asked. The response was unanimous "No!" They don't want to be troubled with "free realms" community & mentality. (easy is not challenging)
So why are the oldschooler being under sold..? An adult can easily throw $240 ~ $500/year (at a game) if we want... yet most Dev's are making games for children and try to nickel & dime their parents. Instead of going strait to the revenue source.
Why not go strait to the revenues and make a premium game... and charge a premium..?
FWIW: I am 43 and spent $155 on 4 tanks of gasoline this holiday weekend. (<---- Why don't developers want any of that money..? ^^)
What's up with the "MMORPGs turned into MMOs" nonsense at the start? These are all still quite clearly RPGs we're talking about.
Also it's well-known that F2P rides on the backs of the whales. And if you think that 22-and-under crowd are the majority of the whales then you're crazy. They're a much smaller segment compared with all the players over 22.
I mean if you were actually right about your assumption then F2P games wouldn't make more money than P2P ones. But they do. Because of the whales.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The MMORPG industry has changed into the MMO industry.
But the luminaries & oldschoolers who built this genre of gaming are now in the 30's & 40's. Brad McQuaid, John Smedley, Lord British and any of the people who played Meridain, Ultima & EQ. We are all adults now, all earning income & have homes, boats, sportscars, Jet ski's, etc..
So who exactly is asking for, & seeking out Free to Play games..?
It is children and adolescent youth from ages 12 ~22^ who have limited, or no source of income.
Just had my NFL draft this past weekend and looked around the room at many of my EQ guildmates and wondered why they would want a free game to play... So I asked. The response was unanimous "No!" They don't want to be troubled with "free realms" community & mentality. (easy is not challenging)
Your data sample appears skewed, as many ex-EQers seem to feel that if they aren't being regularly held back or penalized, then the content sucks. Of course they'd want to pay when given the option of pay or free.
However, since the conclusion you presented is stated as fact, it's entirely possible you're basing that on some kind of actual data. Could you link that, please?
Since it's also entirely possible he doesn't have a link to any data, maybe you could provide one showing the results one way or another?
I've been playing d&d and muds since the fido-net days. If you think all of us who read terry brooks, tolkien novels, & spent all those years roleplaying.. Don't want a high-quality game..? Or can't afford it.
Who are you trying to kid? Ask urself this.. why are you rallying so hard against a premium subscription game.?
Why again are you playing your free game 20h week? Free clearly lacks quality that a 15 mmo veteran demands.
The reason they rally so hard against it Phelcher, is they see a great game, a gane that coule probably give them something that the game they're playing for free can't give them, which makes them unhappy but they can't grasp or maybe they don't want to grasp the fact that a good product is something that is normally not free. they've been fed crap for so long for free that they have no concept of worth of something good.
When they see us enjoying something they can't they get angry, which is why you see them act like they do, I've worked most of my life, I know nothing good is free, one day they might realize this instead of relying on a few people to subsidize thier game for them like in the F2P games where they're just food for the whales.
They're always discontent because they're treated like second class citizens by the developers, and they should be because they're parasites living off someone elses hard work, its why they'll never be happy, because the people that pay remind them of what they really are every time to the game community.
The MMORPG.com forums are truly delivering today. Another masterpiece!
Keep 'em comin'!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein "Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
Comments
No.
I played MUDS and my first MMORPG was NWNO back in 1991.
Some people, clearly not all of us, get smarter as we grow older and no longer wish to be fleeced by corporations that have clung to a pay system that was created during a time of high bandwidth and server costs, something that is a fraction of the cost today.
Enjoy your life where you have to place everyone into a small box formed to fit your narrow view of the world. Anything to help you justify being bent over, more than likely done to help you focus on something other than the pain.
F2P is a deceptive business model which the game maker can change whenever they want. It's a way to get about 3x more income per player compared to traditional subscriptions. Once consumer awareness of this model increases, I expect the F2P system to diminish.
Luckily, i don't need you to like me to enjoy video games. -nariusseldon.
In F2P I think it's more a case of the game's trying to play the player's. -laserit
SWTOR's cash shop saved the game and isn't a failure , just look at EA's last quarter meeting / call. I thought RIFT's cash shop sold end-game raiding equipment, not sure if you mean success in making money or success in what the shops have in them. Rift's shop selling such items isn't good at all and SWTOR's cash shop makes them lot's of money.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
I think they still "could be". They would just manifest their interest in a different way.
There are people who love trying every game but have no real need to "dig in" for more than a few months until the next big thing.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Absolute rubbish. Where did you pull that particular "fact" out from? I'm an OLD gamer (almost 60 and been playing computer games for about 30 years) and free games are ideal because, in all honestly, there isn't a pay-to-play game out there that I think is worth paying for. I've subscribed to many, got bored at the shallowness and repetitiveness and cancelled the sub and moved on to another one.
Eventually I realised the futility of throwing money at the overpriced crap they churn out, shrugged my shoulders and figured if a game costs nothing at least I haven't lost anything. If there was a game worth subscribing to I'd be glad to do so, but I reckon I'll be 90 before that will happen!
Flip it.
Subscriptions are a deceptive business model which the game maker can change whenever they want(just look at how many of them went B2P/F2P after release). It's a way to get about 3x more income per player (for a really bad game that will soon be F2P) compared to traditional F2Ps. Once consumer awareness of this model CONTINUES to increase, I expect the Sub system to end...because its already been decreasing.
Stop acting like F2P is new, the first F2P game was back in 1996...you are just proving you don't know a thing about the genre.
1. Swtor cash shop may have saved the game, but yet still a lot of people claims it to be unbalanced with overrated prices on purchases. Maybe that have been changed I can not tell so you could be right about that.
2. Rift shop do not sell end raiding gear, but dungeon gear. Cannot buy the best gear in the game, it has to be earned and even if you bought the dungeon gear it would take very long time to grind get the raiding gear. Because you will end up get dungeon gear way before the raiding because its cheaper and you get 400 slayer marks. Raiding gear you only earn 50 frozen eclipse and the gear is up to 4x more expensive and the weapons cost a farm. The upgrading cost a farm too.
3. They recently announced Rift as successful here on mmorpg.com
Cheers!
Well, what if.. SOE announced that EQn was going to a premium subscription (& gameplay dialed in for it)...?
Leaving millions wanting to play, but can't..? (or won't..?)
I say BS, and that these people who cannot control themselves in Best Buy, will have no problem coughing up $240/year ($20/month) on the CC to finally play thee game, they were told they could never play...
How did we do it when we were in our twenties, but these kids can't? Free ice cream this way--->
I think there is at least 2 million people in the market place today, that will pay $20/month (Or $240/year) for a premium, long term roleplaying game.
More, once the idea of roleplaying catches on... (think EVE)
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
@OP from the top
You're mashing together so many dissonant issues.
Free to play doesn't mean low quality or casual, it's a simple business model.
Then you say F2P is sought out by younger gamers who are spending their parent's money, while the real money is with the adults with discretionary gaming income (not sure why you cited gasoline expenditures in your op - are you suggesting that the only reason you leave your house is because you don't have a sub-based MMO keeping you there?).
Your fact of older people have more wealth is partially true, but is really a lopsided "fact". It fails to account for the increased costs of adulthood and the fact that average personal debt in the US is around $15k. That would tell you that people actually don't have hundreds to spend on games. While I'm not claiming that their costs of living are what's sucking up the money, I'm just pointing out that you can't count adults as having more money without counting their spending.
Teenagers/children have little responsibility (please, I don't need some teenager posting about how they support their cancer ridden mother - you're an exception not the rule, refrain from replying) and any money given to them is generally discretionary and written off by the parents. I just think you have a very weak point and it has little bearing on MMO's. Not to mention, most of us who played MMO's back in the day were actually teenagers at the time so . . .
"There are 500k of us, then our kids and a few million more that would slowly latch on to a premium oldschool game. One Million, all paying $20/month is better than baby-sitting 18 million WoW'tardz.."
What? Where are your numbers from and why is $20 considered "premium?" Then you go on to add that a few million more would just show up. And lastly you say that is better than baby sitting 18 million people. Um, no, to a business it's not better. In fact 500k vs 18 million is horrible. If you're suggesting that a small niche based game could attract 500k and possibly more, I wouldn't say no, but I would say, "Show me the game."
You're putting the cart waaaay before the horse here, you're talking numbers as all old school (read: older) gamers want the exact same thing. You're speaking for an entire community because you asked some buddies while watching TV together. Forgive me if I'm not inspired by your less than rigorous methods.
I also don't understand why a casual gamer wouldn't want a "premium" game either? If WoW is full of casual kiddie-tardz and it costs $15 a month - what exactly is the barrier to entry for this premium game? +$5/month? Your dividing line rests on $5 more per month? The number isn't completely arbitrary because the higher you crank it, the less of a chance you have of attracting that mythical 500k+ playerbase.
"Coincidentally, what is stereo-typing & over-generalizing other than a demographic ..?"
Well, neither are a demographic.
A demographic is identifying a population's (or portion of a population) structure. As in, 10 people in this thread are under 18, there are 20 people in this thread. 50% of this thread is below 18. Demographics are typically based on facts and acquiring the best data to determine those results.
Generalization is a extrapolating information from a smaller case. The second and third posters in this thread are 18, therefore most of the posters in this thread are 18. Likely to be very wrong.
A stereo-type is a commonly held idea of a group. All 18 year olds want to do is get drunk. Again, likely wrong.
So unless you have data showing X% of adult old school gamers want what you're saying they want, it's pretty much just you and a handful of guys making noise.
Look, the reason what you want isn't out there is because the support for this project currently doesn't appear to exist in the market. Camelot Unchained is a prime example is re-birthing (and in some cases, improving upon an old school title). If there were so many people chomping at the bits for something like this you would think it would have found more than 14,873 backers on kickstarter. That's a far cry from 500k.
Now, they hit their funding goal and I'm sure more than that ~15k are going to play it, but it's about the bigger picture. You say 500k and possibly growing from there. Why? Why is it possible? Where are these people going to come from? Are they all just hanging around buying gasoline waiting for an old school premium game to spend their money on?
This imaginary game doesn't just have the challenge of attracting 500k people, it has the specific challenge of attracting 500k people who want the same thing.
From my best attempts at finding a number (aka, multiple sites, not just wiki) EQ1 was somewhere in the range of 450k-500k at it's peak. You would have to attract 100% of those players to just make your estimate. This is assuming all those people still play MMO's.
Likley there is more than 2 million people who will pay for a for a premium, long term roleplaying game.
That isn't the real question though. The question is how many of those 2 million people who would pay for a premium, long term role playing game, pay for THAT PARTICULAR premium long term role playing game.
I'll use me as an example.
I'm currently subbed to EQ (again). I'm willing to pay for a game I am entertained with.
However if that game has ffa pvp, I am less likely to pay for that. Every decision the devs make reduce the available pool of people who will pay for a game like that. After all the decisions are done how many people total in the pool would pay for a game like that, then expect only 10-20% of them to actually pay it (asking for 100% is totally unrealistic).
So once again the real question is how many of those total pool of people who would pay for a premium, long term role playing game, would pay for THAT PARTICULAR premium long term role playing game. and then stay with it.
And I think there is validity in that.
At the moment I am subbed to two games, Vanguard and LOTRO and I'm thinking of dropping the LOTRO because their pve "end game" is abyssmal. Essentially a set of dailies to rebuild a town and you get tokens that, after about 2 months, you get to turn in for better gear.
I might as well go f2p for that game.
give me a game that gives me what I want and I'll gladly pay double to play it.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
If you believe people give up checkers as they mature, than you've obviously never been to a retirement home.
I might get banned for this. - Rizel Star.
I'm not afraid to tell trolls what they [need] to hear, even if that means for me to have an forced absence afterwards.
P2P LOGIC = If it's P2P it means longevity, overall better game, and THE BEST SUPPORT EVER!!!!!(Which has been rinsed and repeated about a thousand times)
Common Sense Logic = P2P logic is no better than F2P Logic.
There are a quite a few dynamics at play with why games are F2P.
You start off with WoW. WoW has lead to repeat content style that's generally shallower and less content then the original. Thus these games fail to hold subs because of been there done that better syndrome.
You then go on apparent polling and taking games down a path of least resistance. Developers call this ease and accessibility. Its not so much on a philosophical(well it is in away) decision for the betterment of the game. It's simply because we individually want features that make the game easier. Even though us players and sadly even developers in many ways don't understand how the choices effect the game as a whole. These games have become too casualized to support functioning communities or challenge players or give time sinks or hooks. Thus two fold the newer breed MMORPG lacks what's need to hold subs.
You also have many developers taking the story themepark single player content style route. Combine this with causal difficulty you have players "beating" MMORPG's in a weeks. Another killer for subs.
F2P model is the saving grace for many MMORPG's because many players simply won't spend a dime to play these games long term. These games are sprinters running marathons. But switching to F2P gets player who will spend lots in cash shops with near unlimited ceiling for spending vs. 15 max for a sub game. You also pull in players to your game that wouldn't play before since it's free.
So, it's not just because kiddies are wanting to play free games because a large number still sub. The reason is that many games that have come out simply are not designed to be able to support long term subscriptions. I am not sure the developers know this or not but it seems pretty damn obvious at this point.
and factor in that F2P games have been around since 1996 and even B2P with GW1 being out before WoW...then suddenly your entire post has no meaning other than showing you know little about the genre as a whole.
Your age...?
I've been playing d&d and muds since the fido-net days. If you think all of us who read terry brooks, tolkien novels, & spent all those years roleplaying.. Don't want a high-quality game..? Or can't afford it.
Who are you trying to kid? Ask urself this.. why are you rallying so hard against a premium subscription game.?
Why again are you playing your free game 20h week? Free clearly lacks quality that a 15 mmo veteran demands.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
The barrier to entry for p2p games isn't one that's really going to keep out the "kids." My son has been playing WoW and EvE (under my supervision) for years now. He pays for it from his allowance which he gets for daily chores. 15 dollars a month really isn't expensive enough to keep out kids if they want to play. Especially when you can buy the game time cards at nearly every department/electronics store in the world.
Well, this is our world
Some, like me, have lack of Money so all my Money need to be spend in wise way, video games included.
Others, have so much that dream with a special mmorpg and pay high price for it.
Our world is really P2W
Lol, yes I know so little about the genre because you have assumptions? I am talking about the trends in mainstream AAA or even I guess AA MMORPG's. Why most games you see come out subscription based and have to switch.
If you're making this about age, then I can only reply the same way I do when someone tries to tell me there was less crime back in their day, than there is today.
Your observations are based on anecdotal data. Personal experience, not empirical data. If bandwidth hadn't been a premium back in the late 90s, you would have played free online games as well and you wouldn't be so afraid of them today.
Your children will grow up in a world where online bandwidth fees will (hopefully) become subsumed into the background.
You think you are special for paying for something? Weren't yours and the generations before yours the ones that had free television? The 'freeloaders' you denigrate have lived their whole lives only paying for it. The extra load has to come from somewhere, the backs of the people are not infinitely broad. There will come that last straw if things continue in this direction.
And for the record... I'm older than you.
'Sandbox MMO' is a PTSD trigger word for anyone who has the experience to know that anonymous players invariably use a 'sandbox' in the same manner a housecat does.
When your head is stuck in the sand, your ass becomes the only recognizable part of you.
No game is more fun than the one you can't play, and no game is more boring than one which you've become familiar.
How to become a millionaire:
Start with a billion dollars and make an MMO.
The reason they rally so hard against it Phelcher, is they see a great game, a gane that coule probably give them something that the game they're playing for free can't give them, which makes them unhappy but they can't grasp or maybe they don't want to grasp the fact that a good product is something that is normally not free. they've been fed crap for so long for free that they have no concept of worth of something good.
When they see us enjoying something they can't they get angry, which is why you see them act like they do, I've worked most of my life, I know nothing good is free, one day they might realize this instead of relying on a few people to subsidize thier game for them like in the F2P games where they're just food for the whales.
They're always discontent because they're treated like second class citizens by the developers, and they should be because they're parasites living off someone elses hard work, its why they'll never be happy, because the people that pay remind them of what they really are every time to the game community.
What's up with the "MMORPGs turned into MMOs" nonsense at the start? These are all still quite clearly RPGs we're talking about.
Also it's well-known that F2P rides on the backs of the whales. And if you think that 22-and-under crowd are the majority of the whales then you're crazy. They're a much smaller segment compared with all the players over 22.
I mean if you were actually right about your assumption then F2P games wouldn't make more money than P2P ones. But they do. Because of the whales.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
The MMORPG.com forums are truly delivering today. Another masterpiece!
Keep 'em comin'!
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre