If there was any doubt about Rift being P2W, the debate is now over.

[StrawberryZebra]

While Rift may have been doing fine as a sub based game, Trion as a company probably weren't. Defiance bombing probably had more to do with Rift switching to a free to play model more than Rift itself did. The monetisation changes aren't just in Rift, they've been adding stricter ones into Trove too and presumably have an equally punative set in place already for Devilian.

Sweeping changes like these really give the impression that the company is in dire straits at the moment. Its probably nothing to do with Rift being unprofitable individually, but Trion trying to balance the books and passing more of those costs onto their consumers.

[Jtbrig7390]

After reading all the stuff Trion is doing with Rift I have decided I am no longer playing anymore of there games. They originally had a great f2p model that I praised and used as a example of what other f2p MMO's should do.

But all those changes just to get a sub is a joke. I enjoyed what bit I played of Devilian and I did hope that Defiance would re-release on ps4 at some point. But as it stands Trion can just fuck off.

Though about reinstalling rift the other day, So happy I didn't.

[Edge-]

Well if you want to claim that Rift was just a single occurence and out of context look at other F2P mmos.

Yeah, you have a few like Champions Online that are all but in maintenance mode, but that's kinda par for the course. You can't have every game be a thriving success, regardless of business model. The reality is that there are plenty of successful F2P MMO's alone with some that struggle. Kinda how markets work.

Not to mention Rift was doing fine during its Sub era before they decided to can the main lead guy who was pro-sub and instead bring some clueless guy who thought it was a good idea to transfer to F2P model with cash shop that sells gear.

Hartsman? Yeah, the guy who now runs Trion as the CEO : P

It was already obvious that Storm Legion was not the success that Trion had hoped and that they were already working on a lower budget for the expansion itself. They could have stuck with the sub only model, but they would have missed out on a ton of revenue for at least a few years if they'd done so. These changes, and changes to other games including Trove, are more indicative of the company as a whole needing to boost revenue. Yeah, I think Rift is struggling due to a series of poor development decisions in Nightmare Tide which have turned off a lot of folks to the game, but it's not just Rift that's seeing changes made to its monetization.

Why try to "fix" a thing that isnt broken in the first place?

Because companies like more money. If you're making a 10% profit on a product as a sub game but forecast that you can be making a 25% profit on it as F2P, you're more than likely going to swap to F2P to make that additional profit.

[Ahovv]

Yeah, you have a few like Champions Online that are all but in maintenance mode, but that's kinda par for the course. You can't have every game be a thriving success, regardless of business model. The reality is that there are plenty of successful F2P MMO's alone with some that struggle. Kinda how markets work.



Hartsman? Yeah, the guy who now runs Trion as the CEO : P

It was already obvious that Storm Legion was not the success that Trion had hoped and that they were already working on a lower budget for the expansion itself. They could have stuck with the sub only model, but they would have missed out on a ton of revenue for at least a few years if they'd done so. These changes, and changes to other games including Trove, are more indicative of the company as a whole needing to boost revenue. Yeah, I think Rift is struggling due to a series of poor development decisions in Nightmare Tide which have turned off a lot of folks to the game, but it's not just Rift that's seeing changes made to its monetization.



Because companies like more money. If you're making a 10% profit on a product as a sub game but forecast that you can be making a 25% profit on it as F2P, you're more than likely going to swap to F2P to make that additional profit.

I understand your numbers are purely hypothetical, but it's worth mentioning the vast number of employees who were laid off after Storm Legion launched. Figures vary depending on who you talk to, but it was most of their staff gone. So in the case of Trion, they made an active move which guaranteed there would be less content in the future. I view their transition to F2P as a necessity considering the lack of fresh content being released. I mean, look at the first fully F2P raids (that is, fully developed under the F2P model): Bindings of Blood. No new models, no new environments. Granted, some of the fights turned out amazingly challenging, but the lack of man-hours invested was pretty clear.

3.0 launched as the first fully F2P developed expansion, and it was clear once again how little content there was compared to Storm Legion. Compare the new landmass to Brevane + Dusken.

Even though Trion framed the transition from P2P to F2P as a "good thing, able to play with your friends now!" I theorize it was a result of their other mismanagement such as investing millions into End of Nations. With these losses in revenue they felt forced to lay off most of their employees, which resulted in obviously less content, which results in an environment where people aren't as willing to pay a monthly fee. The raiding community was never larger, never better than during a subscription model. So you know, even if Trion intended F2P as a means to increase the player base, I certainly never saw that at the top-end. In fact, it made things far worse.

[jackofwind]

It's like watching a friend die from cancer, or a parasitic infestation. The cash shop has taken hold of class, loot, convenience, inventory, cosmetics, everything. Anything you could imagine working towards in an MMORPG, you can simply buy from the cash shop. There's no reason to play anymore, as every day of effort you put into it, someone else spends a few minutes punching in credit card info to achieve.

It's honestly crushing that a game with so much potential, and was an excellent alternative to any other MMO on the market, has been reduced to something so grotesque that I wince when thinking about it.

I don't disagree at all, but this always makes me think of the raid difficulty argument and stuff like that where people just say "why does it matter to you how other people play the game!" I feel like a lot of those people would be against P2W cash shops too, but to me it seems just a tad bit hypocritical.

Sorry for the OT, just a thought.

[Fencers]

So much for "F2P MMOs can be successful" argument

That's irrational and fallacious.

[PosPosPos]

That's irrational and fallacious.

They can be financially successful. But that's mostly it, which is the point I presume.

[theWocky]

Well if you want to claim that Rift was just a single occurence and out of context look at other F2P mmos.

Considering that the options seem to have been
1. Go F2P or
2. Go bust,

A single occurence? I would say the F2P model does work.
Path of Exile works, World of Tanks, even Wildstar, ESO, SWTOR works
My personal favourites - Tera, Guild Wars 2, War Thunder, War Frame and Marvel Heroes 2016 work as well - I've been enticed to spend quite a bit on these as the F2P model seemed fair and the subscriber model seemed good as well without penalizing my F2P peers too much. Oh, yeah - Hearthstone - there's a failure.

Some of the F2P models may be more restrictive than others, but generally, it appears that it works to attract more customers.

The issue with Rift is that they started with one F2P model and then changed it to penalize F2P players, removed things they used to have and put some things behind a credit gambling game. So, who is to say that Trion won't do it to their other games? They have lost credibility and trust.

What they should have done is said something like - Ok, everything stays the same for F2P folk, but Patrons get a 100% XP, rep, currency reward boost instead of the current amount. Something else should have been given instead of features removed.

Also, there appear to be deeper underlying issues with Trion's Rift - political issues from a company getting too close to some players, having a fall-out, bad PR and advertising - perhaps a lack of budget for this, and a game engine that seems will forever be buggy, laggy and then there's the buggy, mediocre content releases. Rift is not a bad game and still has an "pretty good" F2P model, but it is a mediocre, very grindy MMORPG. It's an OK game, but it's just not what it was in "chocolate". I say "grindy" because the journey to 65 is generally a lonely one.

The population does appear to be in severe decline at the moment and negativity on the official forums seems to be at a high. Their state of the game 2016 letter didn't do too much in the way of announcing major new content either.