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.
Yes one thing is "the average a player spends" and another is "the average player", back to Sesame Street lol.
For some reason i find it hard to believe 80-90% of the players of a PAYALOT2PLAY MMO don't spend any money. But if you have the data you have the data. I don't.
Because the executives that run the gaming companies ae a bunch of greedy bastards and if anything, your $15/mo sub fee is not ENOUGH for them.
What other reason is there for cash shops and/or other Real Money mechanisms (Sony Station cash, extra fee card games and the like) going into existing P2P games?
If they could charge higher than $15/mo, they would. But no company has really dared to cross that threshold (not counting currency differences, sorry Brits). But sooner or later, someone will.
Instead, the so-called F2P games try to bleed customer of more than $15/mo. SOE's Smed and others practically cream themselves when they talk about microtransactions.
Why won't they cut a fee below $15? Becasue they want your damn money.
Yes one thing is "the average a player spends" and another is "the average player", back to Sesame Street lol.
For some reason i find it hard to believe 80-90% of the players of a PAYALOT2PLAY MMO don't spend any money. But if you have the data you have the data. I don't.
It depends. Many of the accounts F2P games are counting isn't even active. Then add some who logs in briefly and the casual group with no Visa card.
Players who play in the endgame usually pay a lot.
So it depends on how you count. But many of the so called players would not pay 15 bucks monthly at all.
Companies like Turbine spent a lot of work comparing P2P and F2P and decided F2P earns them more money. It is likely that they are right.
If 90% of the regular players wont pay at all it would either mean that the game gets more than 10 times the players it had as F2P (more because of running costs gets larger) or the last 10% would pay at least 150 bucks a month. So it sounds unlikely that this is true unless they count inactive accounts as well.
I do know some people pay $150 a month but that would most likely be around 1% and not 10%.
Because the executives that run the gaming companies ae a bunch of greedy bastards and if anything, your $15/mo sub fee is not ENOUGH for them.
What other reason is there for cash shops and/or other Real Money mechanisms (Sony Station cash, extra fee card games and the like) going into existing P2P games?
If they could charge higher than $15/mo, they would. But no company has really dared to cross that threshold (not counting currency differences, sorry Brits). But sooner or later, someone will.
Instead, the so-called F2P games try to bleed customer of more than $15/mo. SOE's Smed and others practically cream themselves when they talk about microtransactions.
Why won't they cut a fee below $15? Becasue they want your damn money.
Duh, you think?
Of course they want our money. The reason they go F2P is that they believe it will give them more.
And the reason SOE and Blizzard opens RMT shops together with monthly fees is that they earn money on it as well. A few people quit EQ2 when they put in the RMT shop but after that got people used to it and I didn't even read any protests here when Wow added them as well.
I guess we are stupid and want them to take as much of our money as possible... Not that I am better than anyone else, I payed my 15 bucks a month in EQ2 until 2 months ago, I should have gone back to GW as soon as the RMT shop opened.
A MMO player and his money are soon separated.
But we really should go together and boycott all P2P MMOs with a RMT shop for at least one single month so the companies stop trying to screw us over.
Compared to creating worlds that players simply love to game in... sheesh, these devs at F2P studios must despise themselves at the end of the day. I wonder how many people working at Turbine are happy with how things have turned out.
Odd that they have more people working at Turbine now after they moved their titles to FTP
Originally posted by Loke666 So it depends on how you count.
That is why ARPPU is used to measure profitability.
Counting active users is quite meaningless these days and even more under F2P model. Subscriptions and 'active users' are terms of past when the infrastructure and servers were noticeable entry but that has changed. HW and connection are cheap thus there is little worry about load and F2P can grow.
The Turbine model is genius. What is wrong with MMOs today? Oversaturation. They are all similar and there is little motivation for ingenuity. Console games do not have this issue because there are no fees really and people just move on when they get bored. This is a bit of a problem for a game that can only evolve if it has subs. However, when those numbers dwindle because people get bored faster than the game can evolve (because we are a fast food, on demand, I want it now society) games tend to die. So what is a good remedy? Make a pricing model that includes the better of two worlds. First, you have the ability for standard subs that open up all the content and then you tack on a store where people who do not want to sub can a la cart what content they want to play. Then you add goodies into that store that are attractive and great for impulse buying like the candy bars, gum, and trash magazines at the checkout counter. This is for those who are in the middle of adventures and don't want to suffer penalties of defeat or have to go to a hub to repair or make something on the fly so they buy little tomes, potions and the like to get the job quick and where they are never mind its $1 or $2 here and there. Of course you do not realize that 10 of those little $2 purchases in one month is more than an actual sub. But you got a good deal because you paid for the $50 pack with the extra bonus points and it's lasted you three whole months!... Wait... you just spent $5 more than you would have if you'd only subbed. Hmm.. What's amusing is your friends in the group who made the on the fly purchases too were VIP and subbing so they paid double for the game the past three months! It's just smart business and ways to get more revenues to not only improve returns for investors but to also have larger budgets for future expansion. Suddenly the game has new life. Of course this likely would only work with a game that's attractive, from a solid company anyway... It wouldn't work with a piece of crap like something a mediocre company might make. *cough*Cryptic*cough*
The main reason that there is so many at 15$ 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".
True that.
Speaking for myself, the value of my time is a far greater consideration than whether I'm spending 12 or 15 a month.
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
Guild Wars DOES have an item shop; the definition you gave is well within the purpose of an item shop. Not all item shops upset balance or allow a pay-to-win set of bonuses. However, this is not necessarily a negative and is an alternate revenue stream that otherwise does not impact the gameplay experience - exactly what a good item shop should do.
B2P works for games where there is minimal ongoing releasing of new content, and content is structured into formal expansion packs - see Diablo, Diablo 2, Guild Wars, etc for examples. I do see a lot of benefit here, however new games are toying with additional server-side calculations which makes the necessary hardware potentially more expensive with a higher/longer return on investment.
B2P works for games where there is minimal ongoing releasing of new content, and content is structured into formal expansion packs - see Diablo, Diablo 2, Guild Wars, etc for examples. I do see a lot of benefit here, however new games are toying with additional server-side calculations which makes the necessary hardware potentially more expensive with a higher/longer return on investment.
B2P model with in-game shop can be used to sell DLCs (micro-add-ons) that can be released as often as regular content patches of P2P games. Best example of such DLCs are in offline games now: Lair of the Shadowbroker and Kasumi: Stolen Memory for ME2, Witch Hunt and Golems of Amgarrak for DA and so on.
Such DLCs do not have a lot of content and cost just 5$ (or so). The only thing such DLCs add to the game is one more portion of game's lore.
So, as I told before many times: Im sure that B2P model is perfect for a good MMORPG.
I mean item shops that offer you game advantage on high price and f2p games.
why?
simply because many of us aready tryed it, got pwned / disappointed & stoped play them. means they will not have enought income from item shops if only 10% use it, even if these supposed *crazy* 10% will spend 1000$ each it nothing compare to whole population playing for free & asking for service etc.
Turbine is not on this list as LOtRO is not using f2p classic model, but have mixed option, and tbh is way better to pay at least for some months then use item shop (known by all). Beside it not cost 15$ anymore but more like 10$ so it all good.
Then we have trash games like Silkroad, Runes of Magic (best of list), then many other Asian craps.
They became old, known & way less attractive for new players. Old players or play for free or spend very few as guys who spend a lot usually not stay long.
I would prefer other system: buy for very high price (like 80-100$), make sub for 6 months but 5$/ per months or no sub (only I guess long sub is better to hold folks inside), then fast add new part (content) to buy, again high price.
Item shop for cosmetic or non game stuff never bother me (even WoW have it).
I would rather pay a lot to buy new content and/or small month sub for GW then have nothing new to do there, for example. Not sure how long GW 2 will last if they will not add new content.
So may be game is die not because of fee, but because it not add more to play.
Beside less sub fee may bring more people to play, but I guess only if you sell long time sub. BTW I think at any game you have cheaper sub if you buy longtime, even in WoW.
I guess simple game Runescape had lot of people as they used low sub / noob area f2p system, and if they fail it not because of sub but because of total control of game by provider: no free trade, no real pvp, total language control, report on every little thing. Who can play such game? Only degen kids I guess, that why they try hard to change it & attract new customers, but I guess this game will never succeed again as it just too old.
try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises. Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2
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.
Yes one thing is "the average a player spends" and another is "the average player", back to Sesame Street lol.
For some reason i find it hard to believe 80-90% of the players of a PAYALOT2PLAY MMO don't spend any money. But if you have the data you have the data. I don't.
More than glad to share the data, as it helps to dispel much of the myth and misinformation about F2P. Here's a few great links to information that give accurate info and factual numbers:
You use the term PAYALOTTOPLAY so it's worth considering this:
For six months of a F2P, most of the players spend nothing.
For six months of a subscription game, 100% of the players spent over $100.00.
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 six months of a subscription game, 100% of the players spent over $100.00.
Specific counter-example: EVE
Get a 21-day free trial, then pay $20 to subscribe and get your first 30 days, then pay $38.95 for another 90 days. Your first 141 days will cost you $58.95. You can then either pay $14.95 for another 30 days, which takes you to 171 days (pretty close to six months) for $73.90, or sub up for another 90 days which gets you 231 days (near to 8 months) for $98.
Freemium MMOs work with drug-dealer method. First taste is always free!
People start playing and like it, then look at cash shop, see shiny new mount (5$) and XP scrolls [4,5$) and new area unlock (10$) and they end up paying 20$ for their once 15$ a month game.
Basically, in freemium games the stick is free but carrot will cost ya, therefore its no suprise that its more profitable model for devs than static subscription.
I decided to see if you are right or not, that it is cheaper to pay subscription over the Freemium model of LOTRO or DDO. So I created a LOTRO trail account and looked at the points it would cost me to buy everything I need to play the game right from the start, so I could play for one year. Plus I looked to see how much it would cost me to play a subscription based MMO for a year (I went with WoW because it has the largest population). Ok now for the comparison:
World of Warcraft if I started today and had to buy the game plus pay for the subscription:
Subscription cost for 11 months with the first month free - $165
World of Warcraft battle chest that includes WoW and the Burning Crusade - $39
Wrath of the Lich King - $39
Cataclysm - $39
For a grand total: $282 plus tax if you buy it local or the website charges it.
LOTRO if I started today and had to download and then buy all the content I wanted to play.
15,000 - $150 or 5000 for $50
These points would get me the following: Mines of Moria- 2495 points, Misty Mountains -695 points, North Downs – 595 points, Enedwaith – 695 points, Eregion – 695 points, Evendim – 595 points, Forochel – 595 points, Angmar – 595 points, Trollshaws – 595 points, currency cap – 495 points, 2 character slots added-1190 points, Auction house upgrade – 95 points, Class Rune Keeper - 795 points, Class Warden – 795 points.
So with $150 I would get all the areas unlocked, all the classes, and a few account upgrades. Plus I would have 4075 points left over, with more points added while I am playing the game since you get points added for accomplishing certain things while playing.
So let’s see subscription base gaming is $282, while LOTRO freemium is $150 with a bunch of points left over. So which companies are the drug dealers taking advantage of their customers again? Because I do not know about you but one number does seem bigger, in fact just the subscription for WoW is more then I would spend in LOTRO.
I find it interesting that you equate freemium with ripping people off when subscription base games cost more to start and play. But what do I know, subscription base gaming is better than ever other entertainment model according to these boards.
Freemium MMOs work with drug-dealer method. First taste is always free!
People start playing and like it, then look at cash shop, see shiny new mount (5$) and XP scrolls [4,5$) and new area unlock (10$) and they end up paying 20$ for their once 15$ a month game.
Basically, in freemium games the stick is free but carrot will cost ya, therefore its no suprise that its more profitable model for devs than static subscription.
I decided to see if you are right or not, that it is cheaper to pay subscription over the Freemium model of LOTRO or DDO. So I created a LOTRO trail account and looked at the points it would cost me to buy everything I need to play the game right from the start, so I could play for one year. Plus I looked to see how much it would cost me to play a subscription based MMO for a year (I went with WoW because it has the largest population). Ok now for the comparison:
World of Warcraft if I started today and had to buy the game plus pay for the subscription:
Subscription cost for 11 months with the first month free - $165
World of Warcraft battle chest that includes WoW and the Burning Crusade - $39
Wrath of the Lich King - $39
Cataclysm - $39
For a grand total: $282 plus tax if you buy it local or the website charges it.
LOTRO if I started today and had to download and then buy all the content I wanted to play.
15,000 - $150 or 5000 for $50
These points would get me the following: Mines of Moria- 2495 points, Misty Mountains -695 points, North Downs – 595 points, Enedwaith – 695 points, Eregion – 695 points, Evendim – 595 points, Forochel – 595 points, Angmar – 595 points, Trollshaws – 595 points, currency cap – 495 points, 2 character slots added-1190 points, Auction house upgrade – 95 points, Class Rune Keeper - 795 points, Class Warden – 795 points.
So with $150 I would get all the areas unlocked, all the classes, and a few account upgrades. Plus I would have 4075 points left over, with more points added while I am playing the game since you get points added for accomplishing certain things while playing.
So let’s see subscription base gaming is $282, while LOTRO freemium is $150 with a bunch of points left over. So which companies are the drug dealers taking advantage of their customers again? Because I do not know about you but one number does seem bigger, in fact just the subscription for WoW is more then I would spend in LOTRO.
I find it interesting that you equate freemium with ripping people off when subscription base games cost more to start and play. But what do I know, subscription base gaming is better than ever other entertainment model according to these boards.
World of Warcraft though is an exception compared to other P2P games, due to, having to buy the expansions separately at such costs. But with that said, your point stll stands.
Many have said that, some one will try to go beyond the threshold of $15/month at some point (increasing sub price), but that has been speculated the last five years. Based on trends I am seeing, in my opinion, someone will probably go towards the threshold of dropping the sub price of $15/month to $12/month, or possibly, $10/month. The drop of sub price per month will be mitigated with an increase of item shops. I suspect many P2P games will not fully convert to F2P models, but they will adopt even more of the strategies F2P games use.
And once again as we are now into some 10 pages of debate, virtually everyone seems to being posting that they are spending MONEY on what is called "free to play". The debate should not be what it cost to play these games but rather the fact the people are suckered into thinking that "free to play" means free when in fact is does not.
People who are lucky enough to find the perfect MMO for them will play for a long time and a great deal of hours per week. I would completely pay $100 month (to be completely frank) if the game was completely amazing. Many people pay almost that much for cable.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Well $15.00 is still one of the cheapest forms of entertainment but now companies are starting to ass microtransactions along with their monthly fee. You know it is like this, don't like it then don't buy it. I very much wish we had a company who made a quality mmo for $9.95 a month but companies having a heart doesn't put money in their pockets, money does. Sad but true.
For six months of a subscription game, 100% of the players spent over $100.00.
Specific counter-example: EVE
Get a 21-day free trial, then pay $20 to subscribe and get your first 30 days, then pay $38.95 for another 90 days. Your first 141 days will cost you $58.95. You can then either pay $14.95 for another 30 days, which takes you to 171 days (pretty close to six months) for $73.90, or sub up for another 90 days which gets you 231 days (near to 8 months) for $98.
So not 100%.
Yes, Malcanis, if you figure in an extended trial period and use a promotion and buy the 3-, 6-, 12-month discount plans for most MMOs you can spend under $100. I am hoping that you did actually understand the point and didn't just get caught up in minutia since you used the extreme exception (no box fee and extended trial, for example) rather than the rule to reach your conclusion.
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
Comments
Yes one thing is "the average a player spends" and another is "the average player", back to Sesame Street lol.
For some reason i find it hard to believe 80-90% of the players of a PAYALOT2PLAY MMO don't spend any money. But if you have the data you have the data. I don't.
An honest review of SW:TOR 6/10 (Danny Wojcicki)
To the OP:
Because the executives that run the gaming companies ae a bunch of greedy bastards and if anything, your $15/mo sub fee is not ENOUGH for them.
What other reason is there for cash shops and/or other Real Money mechanisms (Sony Station cash, extra fee card games and the like) going into existing P2P games?
If they could charge higher than $15/mo, they would. But no company has really dared to cross that threshold (not counting currency differences, sorry Brits). But sooner or later, someone will.
Instead, the so-called F2P games try to bleed customer of more than $15/mo. SOE's Smed and others practically cream themselves when they talk about microtransactions.
Why won't they cut a fee below $15? Becasue they want your damn money.
It depends. Many of the accounts F2P games are counting isn't even active. Then add some who logs in briefly and the casual group with no Visa card.
Players who play in the endgame usually pay a lot.
So it depends on how you count. But many of the so called players would not pay 15 bucks monthly at all.
Companies like Turbine spent a lot of work comparing P2P and F2P and decided F2P earns them more money. It is likely that they are right.
If 90% of the regular players wont pay at all it would either mean that the game gets more than 10 times the players it had as F2P (more because of running costs gets larger) or the last 10% would pay at least 150 bucks a month. So it sounds unlikely that this is true unless they count inactive accounts as well.
I do know some people pay $150 a month but that would most likely be around 1% and not 10%.
Duh, you think?
Of course they want our money. The reason they go F2P is that they believe it will give them more.
And the reason SOE and Blizzard opens RMT shops together with monthly fees is that they earn money on it as well. A few people quit EQ2 when they put in the RMT shop but after that got people used to it and I didn't even read any protests here when Wow added them as well.
I guess we are stupid and want them to take as much of our money as possible... Not that I am better than anyone else, I payed my 15 bucks a month in EQ2 until 2 months ago, I should have gone back to GW as soon as the RMT shop opened.
A MMO player and his money are soon separated.
But we really should go together and boycott all P2P MMOs with a RMT shop for at least one single month so the companies stop trying to screw us over.
Odd that they have more people working at Turbine now after they moved their titles to FTP
That is why ARPPU is used to measure profitability.
Counting active users is quite meaningless these days and even more under F2P model. Subscriptions and 'active users' are terms of past when the infrastructure and servers were noticeable entry but that has changed. HW and connection are cheap thus there is little worry about load and F2P can grow.
The Turbine model is genius. What is wrong with MMOs today? Oversaturation. They are all similar and there is little motivation for ingenuity. Console games do not have this issue because there are no fees really and people just move on when they get bored. This is a bit of a problem for a game that can only evolve if it has subs. However, when those numbers dwindle because people get bored faster than the game can evolve (because we are a fast food, on demand, I want it now society) games tend to die. So what is a good remedy? Make a pricing model that includes the better of two worlds. First, you have the ability for standard subs that open up all the content and then you tack on a store where people who do not want to sub can a la cart what content they want to play. Then you add goodies into that store that are attractive and great for impulse buying like the candy bars, gum, and trash magazines at the checkout counter. This is for those who are in the middle of adventures and don't want to suffer penalties of defeat or have to go to a hub to repair or make something on the fly so they buy little tomes, potions and the like to get the job quick and where they are never mind its $1 or $2 here and there. Of course you do not realize that 10 of those little $2 purchases in one month is more than an actual sub. But you got a good deal because you paid for the $50 pack with the extra bonus points and it's lasted you three whole months!... Wait... you just spent $5 more than you would have if you'd only subbed. Hmm.. What's amusing is your friends in the group who made the on the fly purchases too were VIP and subbing so they paid double for the game the past three months! It's just smart business and ways to get more revenues to not only improve returns for investors but to also have larger budgets for future expansion. Suddenly the game has new life. Of course this likely would only work with a game that's attractive, from a solid company anyway... It wouldn't work with a piece of crap like something a mediocre company might make. *cough*Cryptic*cough*
True that.
Speaking for myself, the value of my time is a far greater consideration than whether I'm spending 12 or 15 a month.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
Guild Wars DOES have an item shop; the definition you gave is well within the purpose of an item shop. Not all item shops upset balance or allow a pay-to-win set of bonuses. However, this is not necessarily a negative and is an alternate revenue stream that otherwise does not impact the gameplay experience - exactly what a good item shop should do.
B2P works for games where there is minimal ongoing releasing of new content, and content is structured into formal expansion packs - see Diablo, Diablo 2, Guild Wars, etc for examples. I do see a lot of benefit here, however new games are toying with additional server-side calculations which makes the necessary hardware potentially more expensive with a higher/longer return on investment.
B2P model with in-game shop can be used to sell DLCs (micro-add-ons) that can be released as often as regular content patches of P2P games. Best example of such DLCs are in offline games now: Lair of the Shadowbroker and Kasumi: Stolen Memory for ME2, Witch Hunt and Golems of Amgarrak for DA and so on.
Such DLCs do not have a lot of content and cost just 5$ (or so). The only thing such DLCs add to the game is one more portion of game's lore.
So, as I told before many times: Im sure that B2P model is perfect for a good MMORPG.
somehow I guess item shop system will die fast,
I mean item shops that offer you game advantage on high price and f2p games.
why?
simply because many of us aready tryed it, got pwned / disappointed & stoped play them. means they will not have enought income from item shops if only 10% use it, even if these supposed *crazy* 10% will spend 1000$ each it nothing compare to whole population playing for free & asking for service etc.
Turbine is not on this list as LOtRO is not using f2p classic model, but have mixed option, and tbh is way better to pay at least for some months then use item shop (known by all). Beside it not cost 15$ anymore but more like 10$ so it all good.
Then we have trash games like Silkroad, Runes of Magic (best of list), then many other Asian craps.
They became old, known & way less attractive for new players. Old players or play for free or spend very few as guys who spend a lot usually not stay long.
I would prefer other system: buy for very high price (like 80-100$), make sub for 6 months but 5$/ per months or no sub (only I guess long sub is better to hold folks inside), then fast add new part (content) to buy, again high price.
Item shop for cosmetic or non game stuff never bother me (even WoW have it).
I would rather pay a lot to buy new content and/or small month sub for GW then have nothing new to do there, for example. Not sure how long GW 2 will last if they will not add new content.
So may be game is die not because of fee, but because it not add more to play.
Beside less sub fee may bring more people to play, but I guess only if you sell long time sub. BTW I think at any game you have cheaper sub if you buy longtime, even in WoW.
I guess simple game Runescape had lot of people as they used low sub / noob area f2p system, and if they fail it not because of sub but because of total control of game by provider: no free trade, no real pvp, total language control, report on every little thing. Who can play such game? Only degen kids I guess, that why they try hard to change it & attract new customers, but I guess this game will never succeed again as it just too old.
try before buy, even if it's a game to avoid bad surprises.
Worst surprises for me: Aion, GW2
More than glad to share the data, as it helps to dispel much of the myth and misinformation about F2P. Here's a few great links to information that give accurate info and factual numbers:
Puzzle Pirates MMO Revenue Specifcs
Joshua Hong of K2 networks on F2P
F2P in EU Slides with ARPPU and ARPU for several major F2P MMOs
You use the term PAYALOTTOPLAY so it's worth considering this:
For six months of a F2P, most of the players spend nothing.
For six months of a subscription game, 100% of the players spent over $100.00.
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
Specific counter-example: EVE
Get a 21-day free trial, then pay $20 to subscribe and get your first 30 days, then pay $38.95 for another 90 days. Your first 141 days will cost you $58.95. You can then either pay $14.95 for another 30 days, which takes you to 171 days (pretty close to six months) for $73.90, or sub up for another 90 days which gets you 231 days (near to 8 months) for $98.
So not 100%.
Give me liberty or give me lasers
I decided to see if you are right or not, that it is cheaper to pay subscription over the Freemium model of LOTRO or DDO. So I created a LOTRO trail account and looked at the points it would cost me to buy everything I need to play the game right from the start, so I could play for one year. Plus I looked to see how much it would cost me to play a subscription based MMO for a year (I went with WoW because it has the largest population). Ok now for the comparison:
World of Warcraft if I started today and had to buy the game plus pay for the subscription:
Subscription cost for 11 months with the first month free - $165
World of Warcraft battle chest that includes WoW and the Burning Crusade - $39
Wrath of the Lich King - $39
Cataclysm - $39
For a grand total: $282 plus tax if you buy it local or the website charges it.
LOTRO if I started today and had to download and then buy all the content I wanted to play.
15,000 - $150 or 5000 for $50
These points would get me the following: Mines of Moria- 2495 points, Misty Mountains -695 points, North Downs – 595 points, Enedwaith – 695 points, Eregion – 695 points, Evendim – 595 points, Forochel – 595 points, Angmar – 595 points, Trollshaws – 595 points, currency cap – 495 points, 2 character slots added-1190 points, Auction house upgrade – 95 points, Class Rune Keeper - 795 points, Class Warden – 795 points.
So with $150 I would get all the areas unlocked, all the classes, and a few account upgrades. Plus I would have 4075 points left over, with more points added while I am playing the game since you get points added for accomplishing certain things while playing.
So let’s see subscription base gaming is $282, while LOTRO freemium is $150 with a bunch of points left over. So which companies are the drug dealers taking advantage of their customers again? Because I do not know about you but one number does seem bigger, in fact just the subscription for WoW is more then I would spend in LOTRO.
I find it interesting that you equate freemium with ripping people off when subscription base games cost more to start and play. But what do I know, subscription base gaming is better than ever other entertainment model according to these boards.
World of Warcraft though is an exception compared to other P2P games, due to, having to buy the expansions separately at such costs. But with that said, your point stll stands.
Many have said that, some one will try to go beyond the threshold of $15/month at some point (increasing sub price), but that has been speculated the last five years. Based on trends I am seeing, in my opinion, someone will probably go towards the threshold of dropping the sub price of $15/month to $12/month, or possibly, $10/month. The drop of sub price per month will be mitigated with an increase of item shops. I suspect many P2P games will not fully convert to F2P models, but they will adopt even more of the strategies F2P games use.
And once again as we are now into some 10 pages of debate, virtually everyone seems to being posting that they are spending MONEY on what is called "free to play". The debate should not be what it cost to play these games but rather the fact the people are suckered into thinking that "free to play" means free when in fact is does not.
Let's party like it is 1863!
I actually suggest the opposite.
Charge MORE but make the games amazing.
People who are lucky enough to find the perfect MMO for them will play for a long time and a great deal of hours per week. I would completely pay $100 month (to be completely frank) if the game was completely amazing. Many people pay almost that much for cable.
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
Well $15.00 is still one of the cheapest forms of entertainment but now companies are starting to ass microtransactions along with their monthly fee. You know it is like this, don't like it then don't buy it. I very much wish we had a company who made a quality mmo for $9.95 a month but companies having a heart doesn't put money in their pockets, money does. Sad but true.
Yes, Malcanis, if you figure in an extended trial period and use a promotion and buy the 3-, 6-, 12-month discount plans for most MMOs you can spend under $100. I am hoping that you did actually understand the point and didn't just get caught up in minutia since you used the extreme exception (no box fee and extended trial, for example) rather than the rule to reach your conclusion.
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