Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
LastLast
  1. #41
    Absolutely, We no longer live in an age where the only thing in your house connected to the internet is your pc and naturally your wallet is no longer serving one master as it were. Its more profitable for companies to charge whales prices for small things that amount to more than a sub so others can play for free and the games can play more things without being bound at the hip to one by a subscription.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Boogieknight View Post
    I'd rather pay a monthly fee and get a game worth what I paid for it than a free game that requires I dump real money every time I wanted to do anything like get more inventory or another character. F2P are real nice up front, but basically last as long as any console game does for the playerbase.
    I personally like B2P model for the following reasons:
    1. If a company decides to push a 3 month patch back to 5 months, the player ends up paying $75 for it instead of $45 even it if was negligence on the part of the company.
    2. I can vote for the content that gets added to the game with my money. If I don't like pet battles, I don't buy that DLC. If I don't like arena, I don't buy that DLC. If I don't like player housing, I don't buy that DLC.
    3. If I get bored of raiding for a while, I can instead buy quest packs for lower level content to play alts through. If others feel that same way as I do and those items sell well in the store, maybe they developed more of those, etc.

  3. #43
    So far only p2p mmo's seem to be able to push out quality content, as long as f2play games stay low-content and/or low-quality (and not to mention mostly pvp) its unlikely we will see the end of p2play games.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Greed001 View Post
    When people say 'free to play', everyone knows these games aren't free, right?

    EverQuest went free to play, but you can only see about .00001% of the game without the full subscription.

    Same with Rift. DCUO. Star Wars. Every-single-game-to-go-free-to-play.

    Free to play is a bullshit term that rivals 'organic' in its misleading nature.
    Naturally, it's closer to "Pay as you go" but f2p is widely used thanks to marketing people.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by blackblade View Post
    Naturally, it's closer to "Pay as you go" but f2p is widely used thanks to marketing people.
    There are only a few MMO's that are F2P but require you to pay a sub to see the full game. It turns them into a glorified trial instead of F2P. SWTOR and everquest do this and it clearly hasn't worked out for them in the long run. Rift and most F2P don't do that though.. everything is given to you 100% free.

  6. #46
    The f2p/b2p business models are not inferior to p2p now a days, and the reality of the situation is that there are none-p2p MMOs out now that are just as high quality and release just as much, if not more, content (patches) as WoW does. That isn't to say ALL of them do, but unless you're taking MMOs off of gPotato's game list, recent released MMOs have quality comparable to WoW's.

    It actually confuses me a bit when people say that WoW puts out a lot of content. It doesn't. A raid tier isn't actually that big, it's a hallways with some re-sized mobs acting as bosses with a few new models thrown in, and a pile of scripts. It is then heavily, HEAVILY gated in an artful manner so that you slowly 'unlock' new parts (bosses) over a lengthy period of time giving the impression of a huge experience, so that it takes you 2+ months to finish and gives the illusion that there is tons of content. What else do you get in an update? a very long list of class balance fixes/changes, more fluff. The constant re-balancing isn't to perfect balance, it's to give players something to do, to make them feel like they're progressing in some way by relearning aspects of their class every patch. Then you get quests, now a days in the form of daily hubs. Once again something to draw out content and slowly be unlocked to inflate the sense of size. Quests are boxes with random text and quickly assigned objective somewhere nearby in the world where they pasted some mobs. To their praise, they do add new types of quests with relative frequency and some interesting mechanics here and there, but it's still for the most part the same formula that they copy paste and then set the objectives for. It's not all together unreasonable to say "go look at wc3 world editor if you want a taste", WoW is operating on a modified version of it's engine after all.
    And you get this, what? every 6 months? With holidays they flip the switch to turn on in between, involving little more work then updating the mob and loot levels.

    And seriously... if you think server costs(and overall upkeep including GM wage) and dev wages add up to anywhere near 180 bucks a year (15/month) per player, even with WoW's current sub count, you should go do some research, because it's not.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Arewn View Post
    And seriously... if you think server costs(and overall upkeep including GM wage) and dev wages add up to anywhere near 180 bucks a year (15/month) per player, even with WoW's current sub count, you should go do some research, because it's not.
    Welcome to capitalism.

  8. #48
    I hope not, not a big fan of most F2P/B2P games.

  9. #49
    bb subs, hello cash shops.

  10. #50
    All of the models work if the developers follow the simple rule of providing tangible value to players for the money they receive.

    Also, we have seen a lot of game fail and switch to F2P, but we don't know how those will pan out in the long run. We know at least one immensely popular subscription game that millions of people have been willing to pay a sub for an extended period of time. It is still a bit early to call the failed sub games conversion to F2P a success, time will only tell that story. However one model working does not invalidate other models, as long as you can continue to provide value you will succeed.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by mistahwilshire View Post
    Except that the gameplay faces the exact same clunky crap and lack of general polish that SWTOR and ever other F2P MMO in existence.

    The model is useless if the gameplay feels like 1999 covered in feces.
    I personally find Rift controls and movements to be quite smooth and responsive.

    As for for the P2P. It just isn't profitable anymore. Free to play or buy to play is the best way of doing things because of micro transactions. Essentially WoW has it as well, but they still charge a monthly fee. Though some people think it's a "travesty" that they offer a store when you still pay monthly. Yet, if WoW ever went free to play, the store would be perfectly okay? I get that free games use the stores to help them stay a float, but still, it's pretty silly that some people think that way. JMO.
    Last edited by KCguy; 2013-08-02 at 05:39 AM.

  12. #52
    Herald of the Titans
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Tempest Keep
    Posts
    2,810
    I certainly hope not >.< I much prefer a subscription game to cash shops.

  13. #53
    The f2p/b2p business models are not inferior to p2p now a days, and the reality of the situation is that there are none-p2p MMOs out now that are just as high quality and release just as much, if not more, content (patches) as WoW does.
    You sure? I might have been misinformed then but I can't seem to find any f2play mmo that comes close, not only when it comes to content but also when it comes to functionality (addons and such), the only MMO that came close was swtor but that one didnt feel like an open world mmo because everything was heavily instanced and the UI was a total and complete disaster.

  14. #54
    Over 9000! Gimlix's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    The Netherlands!
    Posts
    9,595
    Quote Originally Posted by Valyrian Stormclaw View Post
    We still got EVE, and it is still growing. It has yet to experience a dip in subs. It's been around for ten years and it will last another five at the very least. I seriously doubt that the devs will need to consider other payment options any time soon.

    Final Fantasy XI (FFXI), is also subscription based, and has been running for two year longer than WoW, but it has neither gained nor really lost players. As it stands now, only the players who have been playing since it launched in 2002 still really play (though others have come and gone).

    But other than that, I quite frankly think that subscription based MMOs are coming to an end; the older generation of players who appreciate very detailed spreadsheets, in depth RPG Dungeons and Dragons like mechanics and serious strategy are being replaced by the new generation of children who think that by picking up a new game and instantly "achieving" twenty effortless head shots in a row without any skill involved whatsoever is more awesome. Since these new kids don't really want to invest much effort into games like EVE or WoW, companies are losing profits and therefore believing that they must cater to this new generation to survive. Freemium and simple mechanics is what they will do now.

    As of late, every subscription based MMORPG that has been released within the past four years has gone F2P. LOTOR, STO, Rift, SWTOR, etc. FFXIV and ESO will put a nail in the coffin.

    Hopefully Blizzard won't change WoW too much anymore and keep it they way it is until the game dies. Then they can decide how to proceed with WoW 2.
    But that's because they aren't as big as WoW, having less subscribers also means you can please them easier.
    WoW *had* 12,000,000 it's way to hard to please them all.
    Even now with 7,700,000 it's way to many players to listen too.

    WoW is still doing great, and won't go F2P for long time.
    Quote Originally Posted by Shekora View Post
    Goddamn it, Gimlix, why do you keep making these threads?
    Quote Originally Posted by Sam the Wiser View Post
    Goddamn it, Gimlix, why do you keep making these threads?

  15. #55
    Warchief Deldavala's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Oslo, Norway
    Posts
    2,159
    Quote Originally Posted by Gimlix View Post
    But that's because they aren't as big as WoW, having less subscribers also means you can please them easier.
    WoW *had* 12,000,000 it's way to hard to please them all.
    Even now with 7,700,000 it's way to many players to listen too.

    WoW is still doing great, and won't go F2P for long time.
    And this is what Blizzard understands. Only 40% of F2P players actually buy something and most use less than 100$ a year. This means for a F2P model to be lucrative they need to more than double their playerbase. When you have 200.000 subs its easy to do that. But when you have 7.7million that becomes a whole different challenge.

    We will probably not see WoW go F2P before they are approaching <500.000 players. And I would guess they wont do it at all and rather just kill of the game.

  16. #56
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Valyrian Stormclaw View Post
    As of late, every subscription based MMORPG that has been released within the past four years has gone F2P. LOTOR, STO, Rift, SWTOR, etc. FFXIV and ESO will put a nail in the coffin.
    Dont forget Destiny and Wildstar which will be out earlier... theyre also most likely to be B2P.

  17. #57
    Mechagnome
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Dubbo, NSW
    Posts
    696
    I don't think I feel like having to pay to play a game anymore. Too bad, because my Hunter is a badass and ready for 5.4!

    Still, it's a pity I can't just sell my WoW account. It'd be a little bit of relief to have some of that money back.

  18. #58
    Once everything is F2P, I'm sure someone will come back with the idea of "Why waste all this money buying stuff in a 'free to play' game when you can just spend 15 bucks a month and get access to everything!"

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Arewn View Post
    The f2p/b2p business models are not inferior to p2p now a days, and the reality of the situation is that there are none-p2p MMOs out now that are just as high quality and release just as much, if not more, content (patches) as WoW does. That isn't to say ALL of them do, but unless you're taking MMOs off of gPotato's game list, recent released MMOs have quality comparable to WoW's.
    You can do anything and call it a patch. Doesn't mean shit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arewn View Post
    It actually confuses me a bit when people say that WoW puts out a lot of content. It doesn't. A raid tier isn't actually that big, it's a hallways with some re-sized mobs acting as bosses with a few new models thrown in, and a pile of scripts. It is then heavily, HEAVILY gated in an artful manner so that you slowly 'unlock' new parts (bosses) over a lengthy period of time giving the impression of a huge experience, so that it takes you 2+ months to finish and gives the illusion that there is tons of content. What else do you get in an update? a very long list of class balance fixes/changes, more fluff. The constant re-balancing isn't to perfect balance, it's to give players something to do, to make them feel like they're progressing in some way by relearning aspects of their class every patch. Then you get quests, now a days in the form of daily hubs. Once again something to draw out content and slowly be unlocked to inflate the sense of size. Quests are boxes with random text and quickly assigned objective somewhere nearby in the world where they pasted some mobs. To their praise, they do add new types of quests with relative frequency and some interesting mechanics here and there, but it's still for the most part the same formula that they copy paste and then set the objectives for. It's not all together unreasonable to say "go look at wc3 world editor if you want a taste", WoW is operating on a modified version of it's engine after all.
    And you get this, what? every 6 months? With holidays they flip the switch to turn on in between, involving little more work then updating the mob and loot levels.
    Enough people liked the multiplayer real time puzzle solving content in WoW to make it the most successful MMO in the world by a whole order of magnitude.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arewn View Post
    And seriously... if you think server costs(and overall upkeep including GM wage) and dev wages add up to anywhere near 180 bucks a year (15/month) per player, even with WoW's current sub count, you should go do some research, because it's not.
    Last time I checked, communism lost. In capitalism, the goal is to provide value to the consumer charging whatever the market will bear, not about covering costs. There is nothing wrong with providing superior value while minimizing overhead and pocketing the difference.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Valyrian Stormclaw View Post
    We still got EVE, and it is still growing. It has yet to experience a dip in subs. .
    Eve suffer a MASSIVE dip in subs about 2.5 years ago when they introduced an "AUR" store.

    It was basically cash for cosmetic items but the price was a complete and utter pisstake. That combined with the rest of the new expansion that was a complete and utter flop made them haemorrhage subs like mad. The CEO had to issue a massive grovelling apology and promise to concentrate on gameplay to placate people. They did recover but to say "no dip" isn't true.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •