Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
[Column] General: Only 6% of F2P MMO Players Remain After the First Year?
SBFord
Former Associate EditorMember LegendaryPosts: 33,129
Free to play MMOs are in a significant position in the market today, as things have shifted toward a fewer strings attached model over time. First mostly limited to imported, cheaper games funded entirely through cash shops, today' s free to play game may be from a AAA developer or a small, independent one. It might be a traditional MMORPG or come under a classification of “MMO” for data purposes and include genres like MOBAs. Although getting players into a game seems to be the earliest focus, what's really impacting the bottom line seems to be player retention. A new report released last week looks at player retention---how many players continue to play a given game—in free to play MMOs and features some important numbers.
Read more of Christina Gonzalez's The Social Hub: Only 6% of F2P MMO Players Remain After the First Year?
)
Comments
I always play mmorpgs that interest me at launch... bugs. queues and launch problems be damned. It's the most fun when it's fresh and everything doesn't have a written or youtube video walkthrough.
But even without that newness factor or throwing F2P into the mix, I would expect higher retention from the early adopters anyway since this is the crowd that was looking forward to the release the most.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
How big can a game be at release?
A months worth of gameplay? Two months?
And how frequent are updates? Meaningfull updates happen from once every half a year to once every 2 years in those models, as the focus is set on the shop.
Gamers eat through the content and leave. They might return once an expansion hits, but its all too possible that by then they'll be playing something else.
Either you make it sub-based and have your team dish out frequent updates, or you find a way for players to create content for other players to consume. So either go with sub or with sandbox.
Thempark and f2p is not viable.
Main reasons I have seen in the last 10 years for gamers leaving games after few months
1- Cash shop P2W
2- lack of variety on those successful cash shops that dont have P2W
3- Nerf, Nerf and Nerf, everytime something is a little bit unbalanced the only solution the3 devs come up with is NERF.
4- Lies and promises that go unfulfilled
5- Political agendas by certain groups.
6- No expansions of lack of content
7- Boring quest lines, get 20 of these, get 25 of that, go back to where you start because you need now 30 from the same ones you got 20 already
8- LAG!!!!
9- Too much emphasis in the "hardcore crowd" or " this game is only for the PVP crowd"
want 7 free days of playing? Try this
http://www.swtor.com/r/ZptVnY
Of course, it's likely [citation needed] that most of that 94% wouldn't have tried AT ALL if it hadn't been F2P.
Not surprising at all.
Subscriptions strive to keep you around for years because thats how they make their money.
F2P games want you to spend all that money right up front, so they temp you with flashy stuff to buy right now, and dont care if you are gone in under a year.
yet so called f2p games make ton of money..according to superdata, last year they published data for most profitable mmos in the market which was:((google the source yourself))
1.wow
2.lineage 1
3.tera
4.swtor
5.lotro
guess what.. 4 out of 5 are free to play..yep that is right and also ESO went b2p with cash shop..
so i think that 6% are totally enough to make these games very profitable.
Them 6% in wildstar not even a free to play game, I'm pretty sure there doing very well to stay profitable.
Any how there noting wrong with free to play,b2p, or sub games, just people forget that there a business they need to show there making money, or people will not invest in them then makes it harder to get the funds to bring in more and faster content.
Even if people don't like how there targeting people wallet, they have to or be bad for business.
Numbers are fun.
What's the average length of time a player subscribes to a subscription MMO, Zewks? I'm interested in your point of comparison here.
That said, the 6% is about the most useless number to look at when assessing profitability or population unless there is absolutely no acquisition or spending beyond that initial 30-60 day mark, especially when it is working under the unsupported assumption that other business models have a far higher retention of release players at the 1-year mark.
I mean, I get that the article is just for traffic, and it's totally expected that the replies have all overlooked the massive leap in logic in favor of jumping on the F2P Hate bandwagon, but I thought there'd be at least one person that would question it.
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
I'm going to take a wild guess that the numbers for sub MMO retention will be almost identical. People move on when they become bored or a new shiny looks better - there really is no mystery to this.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I wonder what the percentage is for people who play single player games for more than a year.
I imagine it isn't be much higher.
Waiting for:
The Repopulation
Albion Online
MMOs are only fun during their first few months before everyone figures out the meta and exploits accordingly.
Take a game like GW2. Absolutely fantastic first 3 months of release. Now if you trying to do a dungeon/fractal as anything other than a warrior or guardian, you get kicked. SPvP is dominated by turret engis and cele eles. WvW is won with numbers and not skill.
What was once an amazing game has taken on an esports feel and has become if you don't run meta, you lose. Fun has become nonexistent unless you're one of those people that can tune it out.
Ultimately, I blame society as a whole. We care far too mugh about efficiency and not enough about creativity and diversity. If people thought outside the box, one game could easily last you for 10 years just by making your own content.
I will say, that im alot more willing to go and check out new content in F2P games vs sub games, since there's no cost for me to jump back in.
They don't want to keep you though. That's a misconception from the player's end. Why do you think the costs have been frontloaded so heavily these days?
Traditional model: Box price, monthly sub, expansions (upfront is standard, monthly is standard, xpacs are standard)
New model: Alpha/Beta access, founders packs, large collector's editions (upfront is multiples of a standard box price, in fact the upfront ends up costing 6months - 2 years worth of subs).
They don't need you to stay, they just need you to pay.
Let's say someone buys a (relatively resonable) $150 for a pre-purchase founders with beta access. They basically just spent $60 for the box and an extra $90 for whatever else is on offer. The equivalent of a 6 month sub. Then you see games like Star Citizen or Path of Exile which offer "supporter" deals that are in the high hundreds or thousands. They have you before you even get to play, who cares about the first 60 days at that point? You've already been fleeced.
I wish superdata wouldn't lump everything into their MMO category. Moba and world of tank population is far greater than mmorpg's so its impossible to draw any conclusions how f2p works for mmorpg's.
To make their numbers even more of a mess, they count swtor, tera, lotro and rift as P2P games, while counting gw2 as f2p.
Completion rate for the 3 Mass Effect games and Dragon Age Origin and DA2. That's account that finished the game once...
The farmers, the metaz and the lemmings. GW2 playerbase feels more like it's full of gold farmers than players. It's kind of a sorry state, but at the same time the people in there seems to really enjoy themselves...
Wow.. way to take something out of context. No where did I make any reference to one payment model being more profitable than the other. No where was anything I said something that needed numbers to back my statement.
A game that relies on money from how many months you subscribe for, obviously will make more money if you subscribe longer. This is irrefutable. Its like saying "if i gave you a dollar, every minute, then the more minutes that went by, the more money you would make". Its an "Errr Duh" statement.
A game that seeks to profit based on the duration you play it for, is going to strive to maximize those profits by getting you to play LONGER. Are many subscription mmo's successful with this plan? Nope. Not at all. Many fail big time. Its actually hard to keep players entertained for long periods of time. This, of course, is why many companies have switched models from subs to F2P. Not only is it less work for them to get an equal or greater amount of money from the player, but they also get it much sooner than they would with a more long term sub based game.
Ive played quite a few mmo's beyond a year. Just as examples:
Asherons Call 1 - 3 years straight
Anarchy Online - 2 years straight, and then off and on for another year.
Dark Age of Camelot - 2.5 years straight
EvE Online - 2 years
WoW - 4 years straight, with a 2 year break, and then another 2 years.
GW2 - 1.5 years
Companies CAN make a game that is fun to play for longer periods of time. It just takes effort, time, and money. Something a lot of game companies these days are very strict and limited on. Maximum profit with the minimum effort in the least amount of time seems to be the slogan of many AAA type games these days. I wouldnt expect something like that to hold my interest, for even a year.
Honestly though, why should they bother making a game thats fun and lasts a year or more when so many gamers are willing to shell out hundreds of dollars in the first 2 months for a game thats designed for instant gratification and short term longevity? From a business standpoint, they shouldnt. They are making good money now and enough players seem to be ok with it. If players werent, they wouldnt be spending the money.Then again, these are probably the same gamers who spend so much money on mobile games that allow the company to spend 44 million dollars just to hire a super model to star in their tv commercial.
I honestly believe gamers these days, the ones spending most of the money, dont realize how good games could actually be, and are setttling for what the industry says is the top of the line, AAA product. As long as that is the case, games will continue to deliever quick thrills for high prices, and not much more.
I have really only played 3 games for more than a year in the entire time I have played MMO's. E and B, VCO, and FE.
I think thats because it is a rare thing to find a game that has many facets that draw you in and allow you to have fun, each time you play. And a lot of that has to do with the people you find ingame as well.
But to me that is how it should be. If every game was a stunning success, the situation would probably still be the same. We would all be jumping from game to game because they were all so good!
So this is pretty much a meaningless stat to me.
FFA Nonconsentual Full Loot PvP ...You know you want it!!
"Only 6% of F2P MMO Players Remain After the First Year"
Why does the author not answer the obvious and important question, "What percentage of P2P MMO players remain after the first year?"
Superdata is beyond a mess, I'm surprised this site is even using their name let alone their "data". These guys couldn't classify colours let alone video games.
For shame, mmorpg.com.
"Mr. Rothstein, your people never will understand... the way it works out here. You're all just our guests. But you act like you're at home. Let me tell you something, partner. You ain't home. But that's where we're gonna send you if it harelips the governor." - Pat Webb
Why would they stay? They're not invested in it.
I know that I personally have no problems dropping a F2P game at any point that I'm even slightly dissatisfied with it. No sub, no investment... the day I'm bored is that day I find something else to do.
The companies all wanted to move to a quick cash grab system and what they're ending up with is a transient player base that couldn't care less about their game a couple months after it drops.
F2P and Day 1 DLC are ebola and need to be eradicated, but sheeple just keep putting up with this crap, and eventually they'll be paying by the bullet they shoot in Call of Dooty 15.
Most of that is true. The rate at which paying for founders packs/alpha access through kickstarters or Steam's early access is growing. It's a trend that I tend to stay away from, but yeh they are becoming more and more the norm. Big companies are learning from smaller indy companies that players will gladly pay just because they want to get their hands on something new, regardless of the amount of bugs. The CE's have been around for a while though. I remember getting the one for WoW when it launched, but back then the only in-game goodie you got was a dinky little pet. I didn't buy the CE for that. I wanted the art book (which made it the CE worth it alone) plus the "making of" DVD was pretty cool for someone who was a budding new animator at the time.
Now though, we are starting to see more and more in-game goodies, that are borderline pay-to-win such as mounts to help sell their CE. Also, hopefully people will see what ESO did with it's subscription paying customers and realize that just becuase a company says they aren't going to switch to b2p/f2p anytime soon, doesn't mean that they won't.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor