Some people, like myself hate paying per month, and would rather pay one time.
Others don't want to pay at all, and never will
And others want to unlock various aspects of the game, but could care less about the rest of the game.
All in all, a very great idea. When done correctly. (Excluding EQ2X for the ridiculous costs for almost every aspects of the game, $60 for a vampire race anyone?)
This is where I do not trust people, I would be fine with paying to unlock content, but not pay to win type stuff....BUT...When you set the precedent that it is a cash shop game, it seems it is hard for some companies to fight off the greed, be it 6 months or a year later, and screw people with prices and releasing things that are overpowered/oberpriced through a shop.
I know you can say some p2p games have gone f2p, but call it luck, or call it what you will, no p2p game I have subbed to has gone f2p. I am usually pretty picky what I sub to.....I pretty much avoid f2p/cash shops like the plague, due to my distrust. Sure I can quit, but if it is a game I love, I lose all that time I played and would be pissed. I am not a big game jumper.
Reducing the fee gets you a moderate population increase.
Removing it gets you a huge population increase.
Why settle for second best? Offer a game free and design a great item shop and everyone's happy.
The companies wants to maximize profit, not the number of players.
They either add RMT shops to their P2P games or goes F2P instead, an itemshop will earn a lot of money and the fact that it is "free" attracts a lot of people who later buys a little stuff many times.
The larger games like Wow can just add the shop into the game, if a few peqple quit thye still will earn more money on the rest.
It is smaller games that goes F2P.
Reducing the fees might get you some more players but I think you would loose almost the same amount as you would gain for more players. No one would change business model if they didn't earn more money that way, it is after all a lot of work.
I understand that lots of MMORPGs are dieing, due to the clime in number of MMORPGs being released.
But why fold over to F2P model, when you could simply reduce the sub cost, down to say something like 10$ or less.
some games make sense to be F2P, thats because they are NOT MMORPGs.
examples include, but not limited to;
*DDO
*Vindicus
*Guild Wars
the more of a OMRPG(Online Multiplayer Role Playing Game) like Diablo is.
I wouldnt mind subing to more games, if the price was reduced, and it didnt have a item mall. But 15+$ a month, stacks up on you after awhile.
You'll find it a lot easier to understand if you look at it more objectively.
You've deemed F2P to be something that MMOs 'fold over' to and that the business model is for games that you have classified as 'NOT MMORPGs'. Remove the bias and look at facts:
- people enjoy buying extras for their leisure and hobbies. Whether this is a foam finger at a sporting event, pay-per-view / on-demand video, or a rainbow mount in a video game the scenario is the same. Enthusiasts like getting extras for the things they enjoy.
- as the past three or four years of data shows, players have been migrating to F2P and Freemium games for a variety of reasons. When selling anything, it's always smarter to offer the payment options and pricing model that the majority of your customers are looking for.
- Many MMO gamers have cicatrized certain 'facts' into their minds (so have most consumers, for that matter) and that is a truly big factor in how and why an MMO can be priced the way it is. For example, if every MMO on the shelf was 39.99-49.99 and you put yours on the shelf for 24.99, the immediate reaction is "That's probably not as good as all the others." The same with your monthly fee. Create a AAA MMO and put out a 9.99 sub fee, and the reaction will be "If it was as good as the others, it would be 14.95." That's just the way most people are wired. It's worth noting that this works in the opposite direction when it comes to discounted prices and impulse purchases, an example of which would be Steam's system which is a business model and content delivery system that I can easily see most major developers migrating to - actually, several already have.
$10 sub works well in theory, but it would need to be for a game that is targeting the person searching for a value-priced MMO. Wizard101 is a good example of that.
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
- Many MMO gamers have cicatrized certain 'facts' into their minds (so have most consumers, for that matter) and that is a truly big factor in how and why an MMO can be priced the way it is. For example, if every MMO on the shelf was 39.99-49.99 and you put yours on the shelf for 24.99, the immediate reaction is "That's probably not as good as all the others." The same with your monthly fee. Create a AAA MMO and put out a 9.99 sub fee, and the reaction will be "If it was as good as the others, it would be 14.95." That's just the way most people are wired. It's worth noting that this works in the opposite direction when it comes to discounted prices and impulse purchases, an example of which would be Steam's system which is a business model and content delivery system that I can easily see most major developers migrating to - actually, several already have.
$10 sub works well in theory, but it would need to be for a game that is targeting the person searching for a value-priced MMO. Wizard101 is a good example of that.
i agree with u completely... i would like to offer up the idea of a declineing membership fee model. u start the game off at 14.95, then after 3 months maybe it drops to 12.95. then after 6 months it's 9.995. reward players for sticking around yet maintain the steady revenue stream needed to provide good customer service and quality expansions and up grades.
- Many MMO gamers have cicatrized certain 'facts' into their minds (so have most consumers, for that matter) and that is a truly big factor in how and why an MMO can be priced the way it is. For example, if every MMO on the shelf was 39.99-49.99 and you put yours on the shelf for 24.99, the immediate reaction is "That's probably not as good as all the others." The same with your monthly fee. Create a AAA MMO and put out a 9.99 sub fee, and the reaction will be "If it was as good as the others, it would be 14.95." That's just the way most people are wired. It's worth noting that this works in the opposite direction when it comes to discounted prices and impulse purchases, an example of which would be Steam's system which is a business model and content delivery system that I can easily see most major developers migrating to - actually, several already have.
$10 sub works well in theory, but it would need to be for a game that is targeting the person searching for a value-priced MMO. Wizard101 is a good example of that.
i agree with u completely... i would like to offer up the idea of a declineing membership fee model. u start the game off at 14.95, then after 3 months maybe it drops to 12.95. then after 6 months it's 9.995. reward players for sticking around yet maintain the steady revenue stream needed to provide good customer service and quality expansions and up grades.
Interesting approach, Knyght. Sounds like a neat veteran reward system.
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
For some people, just the concept of the game having a monthly fee is a turn-off.
That's sooo true. In some cases it just baffles me. I know a few Americans ( middle aged adults!) who play Rappelz and spend 60+ dollars a month. On some occasions 100's. They've never tryed a "western" MMo. Not one! Considering they are just gambling for pixels on a poorly supported game, I find it hard to understand why they haven't. Taming protection , ancient skill cubes, equipment protections, ancient strike cubes, ancient defense cubes. God the list goes on and on....
I tryed a few times to get them to consider playing WoW or Eve. Their response is always, either 'I need to buy a client and pay a monthly fee?!" or "I can come and go in Rappelz as I please with no obligation to keep paying to play". Not understanding for a fraction of what they gamble away (for virtual items) in Asian grinders in a year, they could of bought 5 years (if not a hell of a lot more) of gaming time in any western MMo. Literally!
Towards the topic.
As others have said. The free model is about getting a large group of people in who other wise wouldn't try or even look at your game. Just lowering your fee probably wouldn't lure in nearly as many as letting anyone in and play for a month or 2. Getting them hooked. Then asking them to spend 20- 50 bucks before they get bored and leave. It's just 20 bucks right? Not that much!
If they don't leave. Someone will be spending money on them. What I mean is. I have only ever spent $25 in total on free to plays. That was in Rappelz. I played it on and off for sometime. Mainly when I was bored or feeling cheap. Though I have acquired over 800 dollars, with in game currency, worth of cash shop items on my caracters.
People act as if free to plays don't make much money. I bet it would shock a lot of people, myself included, as to how much some Korean grinders make. It will not be WoW numbers but I bet there's a few f2p's that would top some of the more popular subscription based games. Very curious as to how much Rappelz. pulls in for Gala-Net for instance.
The main reason that there is so many at 15$ a month, then a complete drop to F2P, is because the average idiot sees anything that costs less than the standard as an inferior product. When you go to the grocery store and see a 30-cent can of soup next to the 1$ name brand, your first instinct is to get the more expensive version because it *has to* be better. The same thing applies when you see a game with a 15$ sub next to one with a 7$ one, your immediate thought process is that the former *has to* be that much better than the latter.
Hell, people would take potshots at any game with a lower sub in these forums anyway, blatantly stating "The game must not be that good if it's only X dollars per month. I say don't bother with it, and I will make it my personal crusade to s**t on this game without having any idea of how good it may actually be".
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4 Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
- Many MMO gamers have cicatrized certain 'facts' into their minds (so have most consumers, for that matter) and that is a truly big factor in how and why an MMO can be priced the way it is. For example, if every MMO on the shelf was 39.99-49.99 and you put yours on the shelf for 24.99, the immediate reaction is "That's probably not as good as all the others." The same with your monthly fee. Create a AAA MMO and put out a 9.99 sub fee, and the reaction will be "If it was as good as the others, it would be 14.95." That's just the way most people are wired. It's worth noting that this works in the opposite direction when it comes to discounted prices and impulse purchases, an example of which would be Steam's system which is a business model and content delivery system that I can easily see most major developers migrating to - actually, several already have.
$10 sub works well in theory, but it would need to be for a game that is targeting the person searching for a value-priced MMO. Wizard101 is a good example of that.
i agree with u completely... i would like to offer up the idea of a declineing membership fee model. u start the game off at 14.95, then after 3 months maybe it drops to 12.95. then after 6 months it's 9.995. reward players for sticking around yet maintain the steady revenue stream needed to provide good customer service and quality expansions and up grades.
Interesting approach, Knyght. Sounds like a neat veteran reward system.
I like the idea a lot. I think it is a sound application of Marginal Utility.
The main reason that there is so many at 15$ a month, then a complete drop to F2P, is because the average idiot sees anything that costs less than the standard as an inferior product.
I think a combination of a $10 monthly fee with a purely cosmetic item shop would be the best choice. Item shops with overpowered items keeps a lot of potential players away. The normal $15 monthly fee seems a bit much also these days considering the quality of games released in the past few years have been sub par in my opinion. A good mix of both would be a great way to pull all types of players into the game, while keeping everyone else happy for the most part.
Just a FYI: I have no problem paying $15/mo so long as the quality is worth it. I would be willing to pay up to $30/mo for an updated version of Asheron's Call.
Playing - Minecraft, 7 Days To Die, Darkfall:ROA, Path of Exile
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
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
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
I don't think you understand what an average is.
80-90 percent of the players in a F2P MMO spend nothing on the game. Knowing that, help me understand where I am wrong.
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
The answer is simple: 15 bucks isn't a lot of money. 5 bucks is even less. So if they charge 10 bucks, they're only saving me 5 bucks, which isn't much. If a game is worth 10 a month, it's worth 15 a month.
Companies charge what the market will bear. Its as simple as that. If ppl stopped paying the current prices, they would be reduced. The same holds true for the payment method. Obviously F2P models make money, P2P models make money, and hybrid models make money. All of these cases boils down the the market.
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
I don't think you understand what an average is.
80-90 percent of the players in a F2P MMO spend nothing on the game. Knowing that, help me understand where I am wrong.
If three people have zero apples, and one person has four apples, on average they have one apple each, not zero as you'd have us believe.
If one person spends any amount of money on the game, then you cannot say that the average person spends nothing.
Maybe most people spend nothing, or some, but it's not the average.
You are of course correct. But I think he meant average as in the your average joe as you alluded to in the last part with the majority, perhaps even the mode.
Venge Sunsoar
Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it is bad.
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
I don't think you understand what an average is.
80-90 percent of the players in a F2P MMO spend nothing on the game. Knowing that, help me understand where I am wrong.
If three people have zero apples, and one person has four apples, on average they have one apple each, not zero as you'd have us believe.
If one person spends any amount of money on the game, then you cannot say that the average person spends nothing.
Maybe most people spend nothing, or some, but it's not the average.
You are confusing the number of people that spend money with the amount of money spent. Two very different statistics, Kad, which is why my post was adding to his, not correcting his... despite the fact that his numbers were completely fictitious to begin with.
ARPU is the Average Revenue Per User. This number is extremely low because the average user does not pay a dime. Now, the Average Revenue Per Paying User, ARPPU, is the number that will appear high, because that average only counts the 10-15 percent of the userbase that is actually monetizing the game. Whereas the ARPPU may be in the range that the other poster suggested, the ARPU is more in the range of a couple of dollars because, again, the average user doesn't spend any money on the game.
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
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
I don't think you understand what an average is.
80-90 percent of the players in a F2P MMO spend nothing on the game. Knowing that, help me understand where I am wrong.
If three people have zero apples, and one person has four apples, on average they have one apple each, not zero as you'd have us believe.
If one person spends any amount of money on the game, then you cannot say that the average person spends nothing.
Maybe most people spend nothing, or some, but it's not the average.
You are confusing the number of people that spend money with the amount of money spent. Two very different statistics, Kad, which is why my post was adding to his, not correcting his... despite the fact that his numbers were completely fictitious to begin with.
ARPU is the Average Revenue Per User. This number is extremely low because most users do not pay a dime. Now, the Average Revenue Per Paying User, ARPPU, is the number that will appear high, because that average only counts the 10-15 percent of the userbase that is actually monetizing the game. Whereas the ARPPU may be in the range that the other poster suggested, the ARPU is more in the range of a couple of dollars because, again, most users don't spend any money on the game.
Reducing the fee gets you a moderate population increase.
Removing it gets you a huge population increase.
Why settle for second best? Offer a game free and design a great item shop and everyone's happy.
The companies wants to maximize profit, not the number of players.
They either add RMT shops to their P2P games or goes F2P instead, an itemshop will earn a lot of money and the fact that it is "free" attracts a lot of people who later buys a little stuff many times.
The larger games like Wow can just add the shop into the game, if a few peqple quit thye still will earn more money on the rest.
It is smaller games that goes F2P.
Reducing the fees might get you some more players but I think you would loose almost the same amount as you would gain for more players. No one would change business model if they didn't earn more money that way, it is after all a lot of work.
Well maximizing profit is either "spend ~5 years on a product after a 10+ year spree of well-known, well-liked products, and put out one of the Top 3 MMOs" or "put out a great product for free with a great item shop". One of the options is considerably less reasonable for most companies.
Incidentally I feel both GW2 and ToR are pretty close to being the former, as both companies are famous with solid track records (Bioware more so.) So I think both games have a shot of doing great if they deliver solid products.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I understand that lots of MMORPGs are dieing, due to the clime in number of MMORPGs being released.
But why fold over to F2P model, when you could simply reduce the sub cost, down to say something like 10$ or less.
some games make sense to be F2P, thats because they are NOT MMORPGs.
examples include, but not limited to;
*DDO
*Vindicus
*Guild Wars
the more of a OMRPG(Online Multiplayer Role Playing Game) like Diablo is.
I wouldnt mind subing to more games, if the price was reduced, and it didnt have a item mall. But 15+$ a month, stacks up on you after awhile.
First of all, Guild Wars is not F2P, it is B2P. And there is no "item shop" in this game. GW shop sells only things that can't affect game balance, things like costumes (armor without stats that change you character looks).
Second, I think that B2P model will replace both F2P and P2P models soon enough. We just need to wait GW2 release and then wait a couple of years
Comments
This is where I do not trust people, I would be fine with paying to unlock content, but not pay to win type stuff....BUT...When you set the precedent that it is a cash shop game, it seems it is hard for some companies to fight off the greed, be it 6 months or a year later, and screw people with prices and releasing things that are overpowered/oberpriced through a shop.
I know you can say some p2p games have gone f2p, but call it luck, or call it what you will, no p2p game I have subbed to has gone f2p. I am usually pretty picky what I sub to.....I pretty much avoid f2p/cash shops like the plague, due to my distrust. Sure I can quit, but if it is a game I love, I lose all that time I played and would be pissed. I am not a big game jumper.
The companies wants to maximize profit, not the number of players.
They either add RMT shops to their P2P games or goes F2P instead, an itemshop will earn a lot of money and the fact that it is "free" attracts a lot of people who later buys a little stuff many times.
The larger games like Wow can just add the shop into the game, if a few peqple quit thye still will earn more money on the rest.
It is smaller games that goes F2P.
Reducing the fees might get you some more players but I think you would loose almost the same amount as you would gain for more players. No one would change business model if they didn't earn more money that way, it is after all a lot of work.
You'll find it a lot easier to understand if you look at it more objectively.
You've deemed F2P to be something that MMOs 'fold over' to and that the business model is for games that you have classified as 'NOT MMORPGs'. Remove the bias and look at facts:
- people enjoy buying extras for their leisure and hobbies. Whether this is a foam finger at a sporting event, pay-per-view / on-demand video, or a rainbow mount in a video game the scenario is the same. Enthusiasts like getting extras for the things they enjoy.
- as the past three or four years of data shows, players have been migrating to F2P and Freemium games for a variety of reasons. When selling anything, it's always smarter to offer the payment options and pricing model that the majority of your customers are looking for.
- Many MMO gamers have cicatrized certain 'facts' into their minds (so have most consumers, for that matter) and that is a truly big factor in how and why an MMO can be priced the way it is. For example, if every MMO on the shelf was 39.99-49.99 and you put yours on the shelf for 24.99, the immediate reaction is "That's probably not as good as all the others." The same with your monthly fee. Create a AAA MMO and put out a 9.99 sub fee, and the reaction will be "If it was as good as the others, it would be 14.95." That's just the way most people are wired. It's worth noting that this works in the opposite direction when it comes to discounted prices and impulse purchases, an example of which would be Steam's system which is a business model and content delivery system that I can easily see most major developers migrating to - actually, several already have.
$10 sub works well in theory, but it would need to be for a game that is targeting the person searching for a value-priced MMO. Wizard101 is a good example of that.
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
F2P cash shop makes more money than a few thousand $5 monthly subs.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
i agree with u completely... i would like to offer up the idea of a declineing membership fee model. u start the game off at 14.95, then after 3 months maybe it drops to 12.95. then after 6 months it's 9.995. reward players for sticking around yet maintain the steady revenue stream needed to provide good customer service and quality expansions and up grades.
Interesting approach, Knyght. Sounds like a neat veteran reward system.
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've tried dozens upon dozens of f2p games. Any cost at all would prevent me from trying them.
Personally P2P games come down to worth a sub or not worth a sub, it doesn't really matter the price.
Drop the next-gen marketing and people will argue if the game itself has merit.
That's sooo true. In some cases it just baffles me. I know a few Americans ( middle aged adults!) who play Rappelz and spend 60+ dollars a month. On some occasions 100's. They've never tryed a "western" MMo. Not one! Considering they are just gambling for pixels on a poorly supported game, I find it hard to understand why they haven't. Taming protection , ancient skill cubes, equipment protections, ancient strike cubes, ancient defense cubes. God the list goes on and on....
I tryed a few times to get them to consider playing WoW or Eve. Their response is always, either 'I need to buy a client and pay a monthly fee?!" or "I can come and go in Rappelz as I please with no obligation to keep paying to play". Not understanding for a fraction of what they gamble away (for virtual items) in Asian grinders in a year, they could of bought 5 years (if not a hell of a lot more) of gaming time in any western MMo. Literally!
Towards the topic.
As others have said. The free model is about getting a large group of people in who other wise wouldn't try or even look at your game. Just lowering your fee probably wouldn't lure in nearly as many as letting anyone in and play for a month or 2. Getting them hooked. Then asking them to spend 20- 50 bucks before they get bored and leave. It's just 20 bucks right? Not that much!
If they don't leave. Someone will be spending money on them. What I mean is. I have only ever spent $25 in total on free to plays. That was in Rappelz. I played it on and off for sometime. Mainly when I was bored or feeling cheap. Though I have acquired over 800 dollars, with in game currency, worth of cash shop items on my caracters.
People act as if free to plays don't make much money. I bet it would shock a lot of people, myself included, as to how much some Korean grinders make. It will not be WoW numbers but I bet there's a few f2p's that would top some of the more popular subscription based games. Very curious as to how much Rappelz. pulls in for Gala-Net for instance.
The main reason that there is so many at 15$ a month, then a complete drop to F2P, is because the average idiot sees anything that costs less than the standard as an inferior product. When you go to the grocery store and see a 30-cent can of soup next to the 1$ name brand, your first instinct is to get the more expensive version because it *has to* be better. The same thing applies when you see a game with a 15$ sub next to one with a 7$ one, your immediate thought process is that the former *has to* be that much better than the latter.
Hell, people would take potshots at any game with a lower sub in these forums anyway, blatantly stating "The game must not be that good if it's only X dollars per month. I say don't bother with it, and I will make it my personal crusade to s**t on this game without having any idea of how good it may actually be".
Writer / Musician / Game Designer
Now Playing: Skyrim, Wurm Online, Tropico 4
Waiting On: GW2, TSW, Archeage, The Rapture
I like the idea a lot. I think it is a sound application of Marginal Utility.
Why not charge less than 15$ when they are getting 50$, 60$ or even 200$?
I wouldn't be surprised that the average a player spends in a PAYALOTMORE2PLAY game is around 30$.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
Unless you're in Tescos, where every little helps
I think a combination of a $10 monthly fee with a purely cosmetic item shop would be the best choice. Item shops with overpowered items keeps a lot of potential players away. The normal $15 monthly fee seems a bit much also these days considering the quality of games released in the past few years have been sub par in my opinion. A good mix of both would be a great way to pull all types of players into the game, while keeping everyone else happy for the most part.
Just a FYI: I have no problem paying $15/mo so long as the quality is worth it. I would be willing to pay up to $30/mo for an updated version of Asheron's Call.
Playing - Minecraft, 7 Days To Die, Darkfall:ROA, Path of Exile
Waiting for -
However, the average F2P player spends nothing.
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 don't think you understand what an average is.
Because F2Ps make more money off of suckers and powergamers than Subscription games, all while being of lesser quality.
80-90 percent of the players in a F2P MMO spend nothing on the game. Knowing that, help me understand where I am wrong.
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
The answer is simple: 15 bucks isn't a lot of money. 5 bucks is even less. So if they charge 10 bucks, they're only saving me 5 bucks, which isn't much. If a game is worth 10 a month, it's worth 15 a month.
If three people have zero apples, and one person has four apples, on average they have one apple each, not zero as you'd have us believe.
If one person spends any amount of money on the game, then you cannot say that the average person spends nothing.
Maybe most people spend nothing, or some, but it's not the average.
Companies charge what the market will bear. Its as simple as that. If ppl stopped paying the current prices, they would be reduced. The same holds true for the payment method. Obviously F2P models make money, P2P models make money, and hybrid models make money. All of these cases boils down the the market.
I self identify as a monkey.
You are of course correct. But I think he meant average as in the your average joe as you alluded to in the last part with the majority, perhaps even the mode.
Venge Sunsoar
You are confusing the number of people that spend money with the amount of money spent. Two very different statistics, Kad, which is why my post was adding to his, not correcting his... despite the fact that his numbers were completely fictitious to begin with.
ARPU is the Average Revenue Per User. This number is extremely low because the average user does not pay a dime. Now, the Average Revenue Per Paying User, ARPPU, is the number that will appear high, because that average only counts the 10-15 percent of the userbase that is actually monetizing the game. Whereas the ARPPU may be in the range that the other poster suggested, the ARPU is more in the range of a couple of dollars because, again, the average user doesn't spend any money on the game.
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
Fixed it for you, hth
Well maximizing profit is either "spend ~5 years on a product after a 10+ year spree of well-known, well-liked products, and put out one of the Top 3 MMOs" or "put out a great product for free with a great item shop". One of the options is considerably less reasonable for most companies.
Incidentally I feel both GW2 and ToR are pretty close to being the former, as both companies are famous with solid track records (Bioware more so.) So I think both games have a shot of doing great if they deliver solid products.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
First of all, Guild Wars is not F2P, it is B2P. And there is no "item shop" in this game. GW shop sells only things that can't affect game balance, things like costumes (armor without stats that change you character looks).
Second, I think that B2P model will replace both F2P and P2P models soon enough. We just need to wait GW2 release and then wait a couple of years