Howdy, Stranger!

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

Is this P2P or F2P ?

bmw66bmw66 Member UncommonPosts: 141

I hope it pay to play, then I will subscribe.  If this a a F2P game then FORGET it.

My first F2P game was the disaster they call Archeage and I will NEVER play a F2P game again.

«1

Comments

  • fineflufffinefluff Member RarePosts: 561

    According to this article the RU version will have separate f2p and p2p servers.

    http://2p.com/6553910_1/Black-Desert-RU-Press-Conference-by-imiguelme.htm

    I haven't been able to find any information on pricing structure for NA. I don't think they have decided. But I did read some comments about how this game might come to ps4 and ps4 has a few f2p MMOs (EQNext will also be f2p and on ps4). So, f2p is a strong possibility. However, FFXIV is on ps4 and is p2p. ESO is also coming to ps4 and is p2p. So the precedent for p2p is still there.

  • MavolenceMavolence Member UncommonPosts: 635
    NA version BETTER be subscription or i'll freaking riot!  *pitchforks and torches*
  • gervaise1gervaise1 Member EpicPosts: 6,919
    Originally posted by bmw66

    I hope it pay to play, then I will subscribe.  If this a a F2P game then FORGET it.

    My first F2P game was the disaster they call Archeage and I will NEVER play a F2P game again.

    You have to consider each game on its merits.

    In reality though almost all games launched in the west are "free to play"; although most of them are not "free to buy". Examples: Skyrim; Assassin's Creed; Watdogs; Destiny and so on. You pay upfront.

    With a "free to buy" game however you pay nothing upfront with the publisher: And yes in an attempt to make money they sometimes get carried away; Dungeon Keeper Online for example. Others though hope to "entice" you into buying the full game or subsequent chapters etc.

    I added the "in the west" above is because in "Asian markets" most games are "free to play" and "free to buy". So publishers have to work hard to get money - and this is were Archeage launched.
     
    And some will mention that they became an Archeage founder and don't have to pay anything - $150 I thin it was though which, imo, would make it an expensive b2p game. Each to their own however. And each game on iys own merits.

     

  • AmbrosiaAmorAmbrosiaAmor Member Posts: 915
    It would be nice if it went P2P or B2P.

    image

  • ThestrainThestrain Member CommonPosts: 390
    Originally posted by bmw66

    I hope it pay to play, then I will subscribe.  If this a a F2P game then FORGET it.

    My first F2P game was the disaster they call Archeage and I will NEVER play a F2P game again.

    I am sorry but there are not enough sandbox players to support a game like this with pure P2P model. I suggest get used to the whole F2P thing or just quit MMOS. You are just a dip in the ocean.

  • moosecatlolmoosecatlol Member RarePosts: 1,531
    It is both if I recall correctly.
  • Veexer_NuiVeexer_Nui Member UncommonPosts: 268
    I hope it's p2p, but in the current market I doubt it.

    Archeage EU - Nui

  • JJ82JJ82 Member UncommonPosts: 1,258
    Originally posted by Thestrain

    I am sorry but there are not enough sandbox players to support a game like this with pure P2P model. I suggest get used to the whole F2P thing or just quit MMOS. You are just a dip in the ocean.

     This is false.

    SWG had 350K subscribers. That's 5.25 million a month. 63 Million a year. And that is for a game that took less than 20 million to make.

    EVE has over 500K subscribers. 500k is 7.5 million a month. 90 million a year. And like SWG, did not cost a ton of money.

    Both of those games were before WoW and the vast expansion of consumers into the MMO market with tops over 20 million around the world.

    There is no reason an actual GOOD sandbox cannot have 1 million subscribers. If they are going F2P, its because they do not believe its good enough to be a success.

    "People who tell you you’re awesome are useless. No, dangerous.

    They are worse than useless because you want to believe them. They will defend you against critiques that are valid. They will seduce you into believing you are done learning, or into thinking that your work is better than it actually is." ~Raph Koster
    http://www.raphkoster.com/2013/10/14/on-getting-criticism/

  • KarahandrasKarahandras Member UncommonPosts: 1,703
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    F2P makes more money if it's done wrong. 

  • TheGoblinKingTheGoblinKing Member UncommonPosts: 208
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    F2P makes more money if it's done wrong. 

    Sorry but not it does not. Blizzard and 10 million people have proved this wrong while crushing every f2p game out there into the ground without even trying.

    Unfortunately yes I think it will go a split model and destroy the game the same way TRION destroyed AA and turning it into a gambling addiction RNG fest.

    All games that go the split model turn into the same mess.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,748
    C'mon now of course it's going to be P2W, aren't they all these days?

    "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






  • WhitebeardsWhitebeards Member Posts: 778
    Originally posted by JJ82
    Originally posted by Thestrain

    I am sorry but there are not enough sandbox players to support a game like this with pure P2P model. I suggest get used to the whole F2P thing or just quit MMOS. You are just a dip in the ocean.

     This is false.

    SWG had 350K subscribers. That's 5.25 million a month. 63 Million a year. And that is for a game that took less than 20 million to make.

    EVE has over 500K subscribers. 500k is 7.5 million a month. 90 million a year. And like SWG, did not cost a ton of money.

    Both of those games were before WoW and the vast expansion of consumers into the MMO market with tops over 20 million around the world.

    There is no reason an actual GOOD sandbox cannot have 1 million subscribers. If they are going F2P, its because they do not believe its good enough to be a success.

    And yet we know what happened with SWG. 

    Eve is  unique because it has no competition in its own genre of space sand box.

    Fantasy and land based sandbox MMO market on the other hand not as lucky as EVE.

    As much as i love playing sandboxes (Ryzom i miss you). I have to agree with him.

    If you think there are enough players to sustain a sandbox FFA PVP MMO purely on sub then you are wrong. It got nothign to do with being good or bad. The market is just not in favor of P2P sandbox.

    Would you consider AA a good MMO? forget about what happened to it once Trion got hands on to it. I am talking about AA when it was first released in Korea. And yet it had to go F2P because they were having trouble sustaining  on subs alone.

     

  • Ket_VilianoKet_Viliano Member UncommonPosts: 271
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    In the short term, that is what is so deceptive about it, the time structure of profit can blind management to the overall return. F2P encourages short term thinking, which most investors are OK with.

  • Sector13Sector13 Member UncommonPosts: 784
    Originally posted by TheGoblinKing
    Originally posted by Karahandras
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    F2P makes more money if it's done wrong. 

    Sorry but not it does not. Blizzard and 10 million people have proved this wrong while crushing every f2p game out there into the ground without even trying.

    Unfortunately yes I think it will go a split model and destroy the game the same way TRION destroyed AA and turning it into a gambling addiction RNG fest.

    All games that go the split model turn into the same mess.

    Considering 7+ million are chinese and don't pay the same as US/EU that number proves nothing.  Subs fluxuate, remember how subs were down by 3 million just a month ago? AA is an RNG fest and thats what destoryed it? Well, expect WoD to kill WoW then since WoD added so much RNG to loot that people are calling it Warlords of Random. Look at all the successful P2P MMOs that aren't based on popular IPs ... oh, there aren't any. 

  • Sector13Sector13 Member UncommonPosts: 784
    Originally posted by Ket_Viliano
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    In the short term, that is what is so deceptive about it, the time structure of profit can blind management to the overall return. F2P encourages short term thinking, which most investors are OK with.

    Yeap, cause all the failing P2P within a few months after release don't encourage short term thinking. Maybe if they did they wouldn't fail so hard. 

  • YalexyYalexy Member UncommonPosts: 1,058

    If the game is good enough, it sure can live on a P2P-system. If the game sucks like most MMOs released in the last 10 years however, then F2P is the only way to make some money with it.

    Also, a game like EvE Online took two or three years, before it really took off, and CCP simply made the right decision and kept track instead of going F2P.
    Most developers these days don't want to wait and develop their playerbase over time tho.

  • YashaXYashaX Member EpicPosts: 3,098
    Why don't more companies use the b2p model like Guild Wars? Its the fairest model for consumers and in GW/GW2's case at least it seems to have largely avoided being p2w and have few bots compared to many of the f2p games I have played.
    ....
  • SpottyGekkoSpottyGekko Member EpicPosts: 6,916

    It's a Korean game, so it will be F2P with a strong Cash Shop and quite possibly an optional monthly "premium" sub for some extra benefits.

    All the major Korean games have followed this formula in recent years, it is apparently the most profitable. It's unlikely that they will change the monetization much for the "western version", because it would require a redesign of the game.

  • zaberfangxzaberfangx Member UncommonPosts: 1,796

    Problem right now for P2P is that the people who are willing to pay for it, are all in a mmo that don't need anymore money to support that game be very hard to start off the ground with to many big dogs with P2P.

     

    B2P is nice, big problem with them only if you don't like content at all or very sell one, Cost a lot money to keep content coming to keep people with out finding a way make people pay more. Selling only costumes does work and does not but will not help be better game few mmo sell costumes out they make it, or people complain about games that is not p2w but complain that they can't get a free costumes when how 2 mmo that know of  make there money the most.

     

    F2P can work for them, will bring more people in then P2P or B2P for them, and all about what type F2P there going to be one easy on the wallet or one just drain you, there are good free to play out there just most people don't play them as there no p2w option for them.

     

     

  • Mackaveli44Mackaveli44 Member RarePosts: 715
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    F2P may make more but brings in a lot worse crowd to the game.. a LOT worse of a crowd.  That is what primarily turns me off of f2p and that terrible quality of the product....  

     

    Terrible quality + terrible community = terrible fucking game.  Its already been proven a multitude of times.

  • zaberfangxzaberfangx Member UncommonPosts: 1,796
    Originally posted by Mackaveli44
    Originally posted by ikcin
    F2P makes more money if it is done right.

    F2P may make more but brings in a lot worse crowd to the game.. a LOT worse of a crowd.  That is what primarily turns me off of f2p and that terrible quality of the product....  

     

    Terrible quality + terrible community = terrible fucking game.  Its already been proven a multitude of times.

    That not only f2p is any game really, I had many bad times with the community in a sub and f2p is about the same.

  • Zarf42Zarf42 Member Posts: 250
    Originally posted by DMKano

    It's F2P + cash shop with a subscription option (which doesn't remove the cash shop)

    From a recent interview with Daum

    "Based on the current monetization plan in Korea and Japan, Black Desert will be a free-to-play game."

    Also folks need to remember how different AA was in CBT3 to now.

    I fully expect the same thing to happen to Black Desert (which is in CBT3 now)- it's gonna get causualized for max profits - same like AA. (this to me is actually a good thing - as more profitable games with higer populations are overall better for the genre than small niche games that sturggle to stay afloat)

     

    This is a good idea in theory, but has yet to turn into a reality. Pay to win games are not good for the genre, whales supporting games is good for a while, a company could make some money in the short term, but wil not produce a long lasting mmorpg. Do you really think Archeage will have a thriving playerbase 2 years from now? If a short-term money grab is good for the genre I would love to hear how.

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 43,748
    Originally posted by SpottyGekko

    It's a Korean game, so it will be F2P with a strong Cash Shop and quite possibly an optional monthly "premium" sub for some extra benefits.

    All the major Korean games have followed this formula in recent years, it is apparently the most profitable. It's unlikely that they will change the monetization much for the "western version", because it would require a redesign of the game.

    What I wonder is if it can avoid the other standard Korean game "trademarks", being hack infested, bot infested, spam infested messes that the developers can't (or won't) get under some control.

    Not asking for it to be totally eliminated, I realize that never can be, but lets face it, Korean made  MMO's have a really bad track record in this regards, and yes, I'm even including NCSoft titles in there such as L2.

     

    "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






  • NasaNasa Member UncommonPosts: 747

    From Steparu's Q&A:

    Q: Payment Model?

    A: The Korean version is F2P. The NA/EU/RU versions is still undecided.

  • xenoracexenorace Member UncommonPosts: 205

    A great way to get rid of these terrible business models is stop throwing money at it. People seriously can affect business decisions from these publishers buy voting with their wallet. So for instance if a game is in a CBT and you are hooked and feel it's the 2nd coming of gaming, great. That's your feeling. However, don't just throw money into all the preorder/founder promises. Allow a launch, watch and be a smarter consumer.

    Believe it or not all the consumers that bought the $150 AA founders pack really just add to the problem. (If you are still playing the game and have fun, you kind sir/ma'am are excluded) Those who feel they were burned, just keep this in mind. Publisher WILL continue to have these high profit business ideals if you continue to fuel them. We as consumers need to stop supporting these ideals and wait to see the product before we buy.

    OT: I cannot predict what this games business model will be, but only assume. If I was head of business and marketing for this publisher and had to follow a path to maximize profit, well, it's quite obviously the choice I would make. Looking at a pattern of spending from other games I would follow the same path in which they took. Founders packs, cash shop and sub options for exclusive perks. So far none of these practices have proven to not have the consumers best interests in mind. 

    S.C.I.F.I
    <Sights, Clouded, In, False, Illusions>

Sign In or Register to comment.