SWTOR Free to Play ?

[Redblade]

You're right, it did close down. So based off the 10 games that made the transition recently that I can think of, that's a 90% success rate given that most have been running for well over a year with this model. I'm not even counting the model that L2/Aion uses, but it seemed successful enough in L2 to justify making Aion F2P as well.

So how long did CoH run the model before shutting down, that there is an initial boom is no question about but the validity over time is in question and matters much in the discussion as content deliver is tied in to that, especially if the developer doesn't fix the original problem that made them bleed subscribers.

So you have one example of a studio closing shop after a transition, and I've provided 9 others for studios that haven't closed shop after a transition. I fail to see how your argument holds much more weight, especially when you look at games like LOTRO/DDO/Champion Online ect. which have been going strong for years since their transition.

Never said it hold more weight, originally I only said that it was interesting turn of events as it was one of a handful games proclaimed as successful in our discussions about it on this forum.

It's a legitimate model that has been proven to work the overwhelming majority of the time.

Yet it's not proven to work better, especially not over an extended timespan.

And for CoH it's not as if they made the transition and stopped reinvesting in it, only seeking to "squeeze money out of the game before writing it off". They've had a number of patches (I think they actually patched faster after the transition) since then so active development was still going on. Nobody actually knows why the studio is closing down. It's assumed that they aren't profitable enough, and that's a good assumption, but there is the possibility that there are some sort of internal conflicts.

That comment was made regarding EA and SWTOR as an alternative motive to make the transition, if it's shown that the initial boom will tie the game over for 6-12 months with increased revenue before it dies down then it can very well be a valid business decision.

And patching faster means little without quantifying content of said patches and knowing how much they had lined up to make them selfs look better after the transition.

[edgecrusher]

Yet it's not proven to work better, especially not over an extended timespan.

Really, so what other games have shut down shortly after a transition? As far as I can see, all the evidence points to it actually saving and improving the quality of the games that have made the transition, even over the longterm (calling 2+ years longterm at this point given that that's a pretty good run for many MMO's). That and the fact that games continue to transition to it and view it as a more viable option than a subscription model speaks volumes, there's a ton of market data to support these kinds of decisions.

And patching faster means little without quantifying content of said patches and knowing how much they had lined up to make them selfs look better after the transition.

To my knowledge, patch size remained almost identical to pre-transition patches, but someone who played more pre-transition could provide a more accurate answer. And as for having patches stored up, knowing a few guys that work at Paragon and speaking with them, they definitely did not store a bunch of content in their back pocket.

[Redblade]

There is plenty of possible reasons why to close down a studio. Glass half empty kind of guy can speculate like you do, but it's all just speculation. It's clear that BW and EA are not happy with how TOR is doing, so they are trying something else. Either it will work out or it won't ... current situation is not something that is sustainable in the long run anyway and it's better that they are trying to do something rather than have the game slowly die with no bang at the end.

I could argue that they should have spent the time and effort fixing the issue why people didn't want to play the game instead, without fixing that no amount of changes to payment methods will save the game, sure the free to play boom will surely work as a band aid but only for so long before they are back to same position with the downside of giving players an easy out to play free.

If you look at it from that view they are yet again wasting months of development on features that should have been developed with the game and not after it's launch at the expense of actual content.

---------- Post added 2012-09-24 at 05:15 PM ----------

Really, so what other games have shut down shortly after a transition?

Did I say shortly?

As far as I can see, all the evidence points to it actually saving and improving the quality of the games that have made the transition, even over the longterm (calling 2+ years longterm at this point given that that's a pretty good run for many MMO's). That and the fact that games continue to transition to it and view it as a more viable option than a subscription model speaks volumes, there's a ton of market data to support these kinds of decisions.

Only game I have come to understand actually improved and supposedly retained a bigger player base after the transition is LotRO, others are alive as free to play but if they actually improved or retained any players after the initial boom is debatable at best. CoH was held up there with LotRO by some which is why I find it interesting that it closed down, if such a successful game after transition does that what does it say about the once not achieving the same success with the transition.

To my knowledge, patch size remained almost identical to pre-transition patches, but someone who played more pre-transition could provide a more accurate answer. And as for having patches stored up, knowing a few guys that work at Paragon and speaking with them, they definitely did not store a bunch of content in their back pocket.

There are so many factors that plays in to that was more my point, but hey if you know people working there you should be able to find out why they closed down and if it was profitable when they did...

[Arlee]

I just hope future MMO developers realize that making b2p MMO is much more reasonable business plan than hoping for p2p miracle. I also hope that b2p MMOs will be good business in the future

Idk... I actually think (just from my observations talking to people and reading the internet) that model type of an MMO doesn't matter all that much in general. What people seem to care about most is content. I mean of course other things go into it as well, but content is the one thing that seems to come up in every discussion.

[notorious98]

Idk... I actually think (just from my observations talking to people and reading the internet) that model type of an MMO doesn't matter all that much in general. What people seem to care about most is content. I mean of course other things go into it as well, but content is the one thing that seems to come up in every discussion.

Exactly. B2P, P2P, or F2P means less than whether or not people feel there's fun things to do in game. People will pay $15/month if what they're getting for that sub cost is worth it. B2P isn't any more viable a method than any other. It all comes down to the developer and how much content they're willing to give that's entertaining.

[akamurdoch]

i was gonna say just 1 word, bu ti guess its 2 letters instead : EA

[Repefe]

Idk... I actually think (just from my observations talking to people and reading the internet) that model type of an MMO doesn't matter all that much in general. What people seem to care about most is content. I mean of course other things go into it as well, but content is the one thing that seems to come up in every discussion.

True, but how many p2p MMOs these days are considered worth the money by significant portion of the playerbase. What I see is every MMO getting big surge of player when it launches (b2p money) that then slowly withers away to p2p disappointment. The investment into the p2p mechanics seems misused when playes don't stay long enough to pay for them.

[notorious98]

True, but how many p2p MMOs these days are considered worth the money by significant portion of the playerbase. What I see is every MMO getting big surge of player when it launches (b2p money) that then slowly withers away to p2p disappointment. The investment into the p2p mechanics seems misused when playes don't stay long enough to pay for them.

If you're going to use that caveat, no MMO aside from WoW is considered "worth the money". However, you can't just use that as a measuring stick. Rift is a prime example of that. They don't have a "significant" portion of the playerbase but can maintain a P2P model and the content that is produced for that playerbase is well worth the money spent every month. But, in reality, the P2P model is so insignificant to much of the playerbase. What it comes down to is whether a game justifies their subscription by offering the player enough to do and giving them a quality product.

[Repefe]

If you're going to use that caveat, no MMO aside from WoW is considered "worth the money". However, you can't just use that as a measuring stick. Rift is a prime example of that. They don't have a "significant" portion of the playerbase but can maintain a P2P model and the content that is produced for that playerbase is well worth the money spent every month. But, in reality, the P2P model is so insignificant to much of the playerbase. What it comes down to is whether a game justifies their subscription by offering the player enough to do and giving them a quality product.

In my mind TSW, TOR are examples of MMOs that could have been way more successful as b2p games. They would be cheaper to develop with more hype around them, they would be lighter and with smaller amount of bugs. Rift is prime example of one of the few p2p MMOs that have made it so far. But the p2p market is not as big as some ppl think.

And yes it is about what you get for your money more than anything but while MMOs are good investment when you compare them to rl spendings, content wise they are way below what b2p games offer. Developer hears p2p and he thinks 90% profit margin, customers who pay to access what they paid for many times over.

[Redblade]

They would be cheaper to develop with more hype around them, they would be lighter and with smaller amount of bugs.

Cheaper to produce and less bugs because they are B2P, say what?

[Repefe]

Cheaper to produce and less bugs because they are B2P, say what?

Not because they are b2p, but because they should be made as single player games with MMO features instead of MMOs that end up being played as single player games by most.

[Redblade]

Not because they are b2p, but because they should be made as single player games with MMO features instead of MMOs that end up being played as single player games by most.

Why not make them as MMOs with enough content to be played any way you want, arguing that a genre should stop being what it is and instead turn in to a single player game is quite ridiculous, one reason Rift does well is the amount of ways you can play the game both as groups and solo.

[Bodylotion]

I didn't play this game since january and decided to download it, thinking it was free to play, but it's not yet? I can't seem to login, tells me I don't have a active subscription.
On the swtor website it seemed they have banners that they are free to play now, I am confused.

[Repefe]

Why not make them as MMOs with enough content to be played any way you want, arguing that a genre should stop being what it is and instead turn in to a single player game is quite ridiculous, one reason Rift does well is the amount of ways you can play the game both as groups and solo.

Because most developers fail at it ? I would like pink rainbow to wake me up every morning, but reality is it does not happen. And same goes for MMOs. Every developer hopes for a miracle and then it does not happen. You can say developers should get better at it, I say maybe they should look at why not many p2p make it in the first place, what players appreciate about MMOs and how to give it to them without having to blow 100 million budget in the process.

Not to mention the p2p financing model with b2p elements is ridiculous on its own.

[Redblade]

Because most developers fail at it ? I would like pink rainbow to wake me up every morning, but reality is it does not happen. And same goes for MMOs. Every developer hopes for a miracle and then it does not happen. You can say developers should get better at it, I say maybe they should look at why not many p2p make it in the first place, what players appreciate about MMOs and how to give it to them without having to blow 100 million budget in the process.

As soon as they stop expecting insane profit levels they will not only stop failing at it but probably make successful games, especially if they relize that you can't push all players in to one or two end game activities and expect that to be enough, a reason I think more MMOs fail than anything.

Not to mention the p2p financing model with b2p elements is ridiculous on its own.

I can agree with this to some extent, now I don't mind a smaller cost for the game or expansions but some over charge for sure, what's worse is P2P with cash shop as that's just pure greed.

[Psychlon]

If you look at it from that view they are yet again wasting months of development on features that should have been developed with the game and not after it's launch at the expense of actual content.

You should probably start getting your head around that nothing is going to change that. We already know that they would have liked to implement all this stuff prior to launch but they ran out of time. Please elaborate what you would have done if you had to launch no matter what or just scrap all the years you just spend building a huge game? It's just too easy to say that they are wasting their time, no, they have to bring it because it's not there. There is no way around but it just takes way longer if you have to take care of all the other stuff connected to a live game. From the very beginning it was a highly predictable that you'll get what you've got now when half of the "quality of life" features were missing.

Because most developers fail at it ? I would like pink rainbow to wake me up every morning, but reality is it does not happen. And same goes for MMOs. Every developer hopes for a miracle and then it does not happen. You can say developers should get better at it, I say maybe they should look at why not many p2p make it in the first place, what players appreciate about MMOs and how to give it to them without having to blow 100 million budget in the process.

Not to mention the p2p financing model with b2p elements is ridiculous on its own.

They definately should... mmo's are not new to the market and some things just happen over and over again. I mean, how many times do we have to explain that only endgame content, new items is never going to be enough? They could give you a new operation every week and people would clear it and feel bored. There is no way that you could satisfy any hardcore player nor keep his interest long enough. Only this kind of content is not going to solve the problem, ever. I think EA completely underrates social aspects of the game to actually draw and keep players in the game. Stuff like Pazaak or Swoop races or PvE arena style fights.

[Clattuc]

Stuff like Pazaak or Swoop races or PvE arena style fights.

I would not hold out any great hope for in-game gambling. The hoops, roadblocks and risks in various countries would be nearly insurmountable.

[Psychlon]

you had trading card games in EQ2 and Galaxies... you don't need to center it around "winning money" but rather around prestige and fun.

[Arlee]

I didn't play this game since january and decided to download it, thinking it was free to play, but it's not yet? I can't seem to login, tells me I don't have a active subscription.
On the swtor website it seemed they have banners that they are free to play now, I am confused.

Currently there is a free trial up to level 15 for new accounts. Around Novemberish they will be converting to a model where existing accounts can play for free up to level 50 with limited access to flashpoints, ops, and warzones. It's not going to be completely free to play, but free to play with a subscription option (aka freemium).

[Redblade]

You should probably start getting your head around that nothing is going to change that. We already know that they would have liked to implement all this stuff prior to launch but they ran out of time. Please elaborate what you would have done if you had to launch no matter what or just scrap all the years you just spend building a huge game? It's just too easy to say that they are wasting their time, no, they have to bring it because it's not there. There is no way around but it just takes way longer if you have to take care of all the other stuff connected to a live game. From the very beginning it was a highly predictable that you'll get what you've got now when half of the "quality of life" features were missing.

From a customer standpoint I couldn't give a flying fuck about their reasonings for launching an unfinished product, I did however give them 4-5 months of patience and understanding that some things would need to be added post launch. They then proceeded to spend that on making transfers that to be blunt anyone with half a brain would realize was needed with a multi server structure, now they once again spending months and months of time developing features so they can switch to free to play.

Do you really think they would have lost as many players and have as little actual content added to the game if they had released a more finished product to begin with?