I think we should stop lumping all FTP into the same category since there are some truely terrible models within this system. It all comes down to execution and not nickel and diming players to death with every little thing.
The fact that MJ's game is set to release right around the time of his prediction is also laughable.
The real reason FTP is here to stay is because the era of people playing 1 MMO for years and years is over.
Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now.
Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now.
that's cool, but what the creator charges you doesn't dictate if the game will be like this. take any of your hated f2p games, change the model and none of them magically becaome a for us, by us niche game that caters to your values. MJ is going to make such a game, that's good. but he's only saying what benefits his business in these interviews. payment model either way is a foolish rallying cry, and the overwhelming amount of shitty p2p mmo's should be pretty sobering evidence of that for you.
this site especially is pretty much 90% people disappointed with every mmo out.....and you guys were like this from as long as i can remember...early 2000's before even WoW launched.. virtually everything was p2p then. back then many people here were just as frothing mad about SWG and DAoC too.
Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now.
that's cool, but what the creator charges you doesn't dictate if the game will be like this. take any of your hated f2p games, change the model and none of them magically becaome a for us, by us niche game that caters to your values. MJ is going to make such a game, that's good. but he's only saying what benefits his business in these interviews. payment model either way is a foolish rallying cry, and the overwhelming amount of shitty p2p mmo's should be pretty sobering evidence of that for you.
this site especially is pretty much 90% people disappointed with every mmo out.....and you guys were like this from as long as i can remember...early 2000's before even WoW launched.. virtually everything was p2p then. back then many people here were just as frothing mad about SWG and DAoC too.
So true. I have been saying this for years. MMORPG is not a good site to go to for positive reinforcement about a game you enjoy. Its a site where you go and argue with other people about games you enjoy Most of the guys on this site hate everything.
Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now.
that's cool, but what the creator charges you doesn't dictate if the game will be like this. take any of your hated f2p games, change the model and none of them magically becaome a for us, by us niche game that caters to your values. MJ is going to make such a game, that's good. but he's only saying what benefits his business in these interviews. payment model either way is a foolish rallying cry, and they overwhelming amount of shitty p2p mmo's should be pretty sobering evidence of that for you.
this site especially is pretty much 90% peopel disappointed with every mmo out.....and you guys were liek this from as long as i can remember...early 2000's before even WoW launched.. virtually everything was p2p then.
What is your point? He can speak his mind on any topic just like anyone here that can type info into making an account.
Well its my choice to back this game, I think he can do it and am willing to dish out $110 to maybe see it made. Why is that threating to you that I want a game like this to be made?
I want a game that I can play for long time, there are plenty of games for you out there that you can jump around for a year playing a different F2P title each week.
Mark is right and statistics prove it . If he was wrong , wow would be free to play and not still have over 9 million subs. Oh yeah the conspircy on this site is wow hasnt got those numbers its all china paying by hours! WOW is a great state to this day like it or not and no free to play game yet can boost those numbers but league of legends. Free to play isnt the holy grail of new gaming except by companies that were failing to begin with games that were mediocre at best. The only game that did not immediately need to go free to play i can think of was lotr online but their sub numbers were not even great to begin with. All free to play does is make it so servers are busier , you can see games like lotr online and even SWTOR are still laying off people now , but yet BRAG about how free to play saved them or made them so much money. If a game is good word of mouth alone makes it money , regardless of a sub and I can tell you from playing wow for years and still having a sub I know if blizzard was to say hey we want to charge 19.95 a month sub , there is droves of people that would continue to do it and just grip about it because a lot of people love wow .
P2P games that are still P2P; regardless of success, are still turning a profit enough to not go F2P;
Rift WoW(Obviously) FFXI Dark Age of Camelot Warhammer: Age of Reckoning(yeah, it's not F2P! Haha) Eve Online FFXIV Asherons Call Darkfall
Anarchy Online still charges 14.99/mo ti get it's full content.
There is a difference between being successful and hanging on by a thread. (Not talking about WoW or Eve on this list)
It's not hanging on by a thread because of its payment model. It's hanging on by a thread because Funcom can't seem to deliver on promises made in the past 7 years.
Although I can see the argument,"For the money..........." eing a valid one. But the game would still be active had Funcom made good on things they said they would do and actually gave some meaningful content updates once in a while. It's not thebilling model that's the issue, it's the quality of the game that currently is. Although, I will admit, this is one of those two sided issues. They do have a cash shop. But IMO, that's done more damage to the game than they might admit.
P2P games that are still P2P; regardless of success, are still turning a profit enough to not go F2P;
Rift WoW(Obviously) FFXI Dark Age of Camelot Warhammer: Age of Reckoning(yeah, it's not F2P! Haha) Eve Online FFXIV Asherons Call Darkfall
Anarchy Online still charges 14.99/mo ti get it's full content.
There is a difference between being successful and hanging on by a thread. (Not talking about WoW or Eve on this list)
It's not hanging on by a thread because of its payment model. It's hanging on by a thread because Funcom can't seem to deliver on promises made in the past 7 years.
I think we got our wires crossed here. What I meant was that most of the games on that list don't really keep producing content which is what I mean by "hanging on by a thread". It was not pointed at AO specifically.
Honestly part of the reason those games don't go F2P is because the conversion would not be worth it. It costs money to turn a game F2P as weird as that sounds. If those games barely update the game as it is, it would be highly unlikely they could switch models.
you're literally arguing something that i'm not. i'm saying that if you want a game you can play for a long time that's fine, but the payment model won't dictate that as evidenced by this whole genre since its infancy.
Remember guys, most of you anit-f2p guys in this topic were beating your chests about it before mark came along and lifting up Funcom and TRION as your champions cause they were basically saying the same shit in a roundabout way. not long ago at all. you're not without a good game to play because f2p, it's because most released suck and they happen to take a while to release.
Originally posted by cronius77 Mark is right and statistics prove it . If he was wrong , wow would be free to play and not still have over 9 million subs. Oh yeah the conspircy on this site is wow hasnt got those numbers its all china paying by hours! WOW is a great state to this day like it or not and no free to play game yet can boost those numbers but league of legends. Free to play isnt the holy grail of new gaming except by companies that were failing to begin with games that were mediocre at best. The only game that did not immediately need to go free to play i can think of was lotr online but their sub numbers were not even great to begin with. All free to play does is make it so servers are busier , you can see games like lotr online and even SWTOR are still laying off people now , but yet BRAG about how free to play saved them or made them so much money. If a game is good word of mouth alone makes it money , regardless of a sub and I can tell you from playing wow for years and still having a sub I know if blizzard was to say hey we want to charge 19.95 a month sub , there is droves of people that would continue to do it and just grip about it because a lot of people love wow .
True, because people actually like the game. A concept that a few people here don't really understand it seems. People want stability and a game they can play with familiar people. Yes there is room for F2P/B2P games, I don't like them and no matter how much bitching others will do I still will not like them, but saying a game will fail just off the pay model alone is pretty asinine.
Debating pay models is fun and all but it all falls on the actual game to win over fans, if it can't it will fail.
Originally posted by cronius77 Mark is right and statistics prove it . If he was wrong , wow would be free to play and not still have over 9 million subs. Oh yeah the conspircy on this site is wow hasnt got those numbers its all china paying by hours! WOW is a great state to this day like it or not and no free to play game yet can boost those numbers but league of legends. Free to play isnt the holy grail of new gaming except by companies that were failing to begin with games that were mediocre at best. The only game that did not immediately need to go free to play i can think of was lotr online but their sub numbers were not even great to begin with. All free to play does is make it so servers are busier , you can see games like lotr online and even SWTOR are still laying off people now , but yet BRAG about how free to play saved them or made them so much money. If a game is good word of mouth alone makes it money , regardless of a sub and I can tell you from playing wow for years and still having a sub I know if blizzard was to say hey we want to charge 19.95 a month sub , there is droves of people that would continue to do it and just grip about it because a lot of people love wow .
True, because people actually like the game. A concept that a few people here don't really understand it seems. People want stability and a game they can play with familiar people. Yes there is room for F2P/B2P games, I don't like them and no matter how much bitching others will do I still will not like them, but saying a game will fail just off the pay model alone is pretty asinine.
Just want to clear something up here...so you don't like B2P games? Did you buy Bioshock Infinite, Skyrim, or anything else along those lines? Those games are essentially B2P games with a shorter shelf life. They come out at full price. They provide content DLC for money. Hell, they give you less content then B2P MMOs do since they generally charge for additional content.
I think part of it is what I just mentioned. Games in general are starting to adopt to MMO style payment models. This is something the entire medium is facing, not just MMOs. The thing is about MMO players who are keen on paying a sub (and probably pay one already) feel like they need to defend it because they pay or have paid for it. I guess they feel they are in some sort of VIP lounge that only the cool kids who pay a sub can enter. Alot of these guys try to convince people, themselves included, that when you pay a subscription you get a higher quality product. This is simply not true anymore. Some would argue that it has never been true.
P2P games that are still P2P; regardless of success, are still turning a profit enough to not go F2P;
Rift WoW(Obviously) FFXI Dark Age of Camelot Warhammer: Age of Reckoning(yeah, it's not F2P! Haha) Eve Online FFXIV Asherons Call Darkfall
Anarchy Online still charges 14.99/mo ti get it's full content.
There is a difference between being successful and hanging on by a thread. (Not talking about WoW or Eve on this list)
It's not hanging on by a thread because of its payment model. It's hanging on by a thread because Funcom can't seem to deliver on promises made in the past 7 years.
I think we got our wires crossed here. What I meant was that most of the games on that list don't really keep producing content which is what I mean by "hanging on by a thread". It was not pointed at AO specifically.
Honestly part of the reason those games don't go F2P is because the conversion would not be worth it. It costs money to turn a game F2P as weird as that sounds. If those games barely update the game as it is, it would be highly unlikely they could switch models.
While I agree with this, I think it still goes back to buying quality. Many games wouldn't recoup much going f2p simply because they are crap at any price. Free s**t is still s**t.
But at the same time, if a company had an absolute smash hit on their hands and one that had long term objectives and people wanted to continuously play month after month, then a sub is justifiable. Unfortunately, there just isn't such a game out there at this time.
I don't think "F2p" is going anywhere, and I think it has it's place in the market.
However I also think thke "f2p" market can over-saturate (and perhaps that is what Mark is getting at) where you have so many F2p games an dthey are all nickel and diming people, people will eventually get tired of it and might want to go back to paying just 10 or so bucks /montha nd getting EVERYTHING in the game with no nickel and diming or being "cut off" from bank slots and all this other stuff.
I think the market is big enough to support both types, and as a smart businessman I would not put all my eggs in one basket so to speak.
Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black. He may as well have titled the article "I'm doing a sub game and my Kickstarter isn't going the way I hoped so crank up the propaganda machine."
I love the arrogance of Mark Jacobs on this one. I'm really sorry, but there are a whole hell of a lot of people with a whole hell of a lot more experience and a much better grasp on current industry models that are pushing out F2P games. Sure, there will be some F2P games that fail, but I'm really sorry, Camelot Unchained is a perfect example of why a Sub game isn't sustainable in the current market and I'm sure Mark Jacobs will be breathing a sigh of relief when he doesn't have to support those $1/year subs years down the road. How is THAT!!!! a sustainable business model?
Just want to clear something up here...so you don't like B2P games? Did you buy Bioshock Infinite, Skyrim, or anything else along those lines? Those games are essentially B2P games with a shorter shelf life. They come out at full price. They provide content DLC for money. Hell, they give you less content then B2P MMOs do since they generally charge for additional content.
I think part of it is what I just mentioned. Games in general are starting to adopt to MMO style payment models. This is something the entire medium is facing, not just MMOs. The thing is about MMO players who are keen on paying a sub (and probably pay one already) feel like they need to defend it because they pay or have paid for it. I guess they feel they are in some sort of VIP lounge that only the cool kids who pay a sub can enter. Alot of these guys try to convince people, themselves included, that when you pay a subscription you get a higher quality product. This is simply not true anymore. Some would argue that it has never been true.
So let's clear something up, you think Skyrim should of been F2P? How would that work my friend, I would like to hear your brilliant plans on how to carry the F2P movement over to single player games.
I didn't realise we were debating single player games here.
This warning coming from Mark Jacobs in a recent article he did which included his opinion on the unsustainable f2p model so many games are using.
"Camelot Unchained creator and long-time MMO veteran Mark Jacobs has warned of an impending free-to-play “apocalypse” in three to five years time, thanks to a rush towards unsustainable free-to-play models. He predicted to VG247 that developers will close and publishers stand to lose a lot of money.
“The whole free-to-play thing isn’t going away tomorrow,” Jacobs stressed, “but let’s just see what happens in three to five years – and I’m betting closer to three – where free-to-play will become just another model. Right now you’ve got everybody chasing it, going ‘Isn’t this great? Free to play, we’re going to make so much money’”.
Jacobs felt that many developers and publishers are chasing the free-to-play market in the hope that a small percentage of players will actually lay down money on micro-payment items. He doesn’t see it as an economically viable strategy."
Mark Jacobs is an idiot if he actually believes any of thsoe things, let alone actually said it. For the sake of argument I will just assume he actually said it so to this I will reply with the greatest statement about F2P EVER!
If anyone knows me I am a big comicbook fan, I spend alot of money on Comic Books, over $500, Some people only buy 1 comic per month. Some dont spend anything but instead just watch TV but the key is if I am into Comic Books I can easily spend $500 and thats what we we are trying to do with Neverwinter. If you enjoy the game, we are not making anyone pay, but there will be avenues for me to spend money because I enjoy it.
Bascially he is saying, there are plenty of people who wish to spend on something they enjoy, it is human nature to do so and this is exactly what the F2P does. It allows those who want to spend $hundreds$ a month on the game and can afford it the opportunity to invest in their passions, their Hobbies and their wants. Human nature is to aquire things we enjoy and this is the basis for F2P and it will never ever go anywhere.
I think MJ only says these things because he realizes his game is going to be a sub based game that is only going to get 50k subscriptions. Niche as it is, that is his perrogative, but happily F2P is not going anywhere, its the P2P that is in serious jeopardy here Mr. jacobs.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
This warning coming from Mark Jacobs in a recent article he did which included his opinion on the unsustainable f2p model so many games are using.
"Camelot Unchained creator and long-time MMO veteran Mark Jacobs has warned of an impending free-to-play “apocalypse” in three to five years time, thanks to a rush towards unsustainable free-to-play models. He predicted to VG247 that developers will close and publishers stand to lose a lot of money.
“The whole free-to-play thing isn’t going away tomorrow,” Jacobs stressed, “but let’s just see what happens in three to five years – and I’m betting closer to three – where free-to-play will become just another model. Right now you’ve got everybody chasing it, going ‘Isn’t this great? Free to play, we’re going to make so much money’”.
Jacobs felt that many developers and publishers are chasing the free-to-play market in the hope that a small percentage of players will actually lay down money on micro-payment items. He doesn’t see it as an economically viable strategy."
Mark Jacobs is an idiot if he actually believes any of thsoe things, let alone actually said it. For the sake of argument I will just assume he actually said it so to this I will reply with the greatest statement about F2P EVER!
If anyone knows me I am a big comicbook fan, I spend alot of money on Comic Books, over $500, Some people only buy 1 comic per month. Some dont spend anything but instead just watch TV but the key is if I am into Comic Books I can easily spend $500 and thats what we we are trying to do with Neverwinter. If you enjoy the game, we are not making anyone pay, but there will be avenues for me to spend money because I enjoy it.
Bascially he is saying, there are plenty of people who wish to spend on something they enjoy, it is human nature to do so and this is exactly what the F2P does. It allows those who want to spend $hundreds$ a month on the game and can afford it the opportunity to invest in their passions, their Hobbies and their wants. Human nature is to aquire things we enjoy and this is the basis for F2P and it will never ever go anywhere.
I think MJ only says these things because he realizes his game is going to be a sub based game that is only going to get 50k subscriptions. Niche as it is, that is his perrogative, but happily F2P is not going anywhere, its the P2P that is in serious jeopardy here Mr. jacobs.
Except a comic book is an actual physical thing, not just pixels online. If that floats your boat, more power to ya.
I personally don't care about the business model. What I really don't like however is having an out of game shop where you can buy stuff you can't get within the game (aka cash shop). This concept needs to go once and for all, it stinks.
I have a feeling what MJ is possibly referring to is the fact that the f2p model right now is like the new west of the business world. Crazy crap is going on like real online money, flat out gambling and pretty much online businesses being made within games themselves at times. Most of this has nearly zero regulation and one huge universal truth is that when countries find out real unaccounted money is changing hands out side of their control they crack the f$ck down on it to get their piece of the pie and ensure businesses are bound to local governance.
If you think the USA sits by and watches companies and players throwing real money around especially money that crosses boarders without regulation and think nothing of it you are incredibly naive. The USA is the hard ass country on the planet when it comes to money crossing their boarders. The interenet is the next and current battlegound for this sort of thing. I can only see more regulation coming to balance protection of customer, business and government. Regulation = restrictions.
There are two fundamental problems with any F2P game:
1.) The small minority pays for the vast majority
2.) The game is designed around inconveniencing you enough to pay
To the first point, it is well established that "whales," users that spend $50, $100, maybe $500+ per month bear a lot of the cost of the game. The majority of players may spend a few bucks, but many never do. They play for free, forever. The whales are willing to pay a premium for premium treatment, but it is unhealthy to rely on a few very spendy patrons to support everyone.
The second point is even more crucial. A subscription game's goal is to keep you entertained enough to keep you subscribed. They need to earn your subscription each month, and when they fail to do that, they fail to get your money.
A F2P game needs to keep you entertained, too, but almost as important, they need to keep you inconvenienced. If the game had absolutely no restrictions for playing freely, few would buy anything. So, the developers design annoyances right into the game. These range from flat-out content restrictions, to time-based restrictions, to perk restrictions. Their goal is to hook you by making the game available for free, getting you playing, but then making it so progression is either very hard or very annoying witout buying things. And once you start buying, the cost can add up to far, far more than $15 per month. It has to, since not everyone pays. If you are paying, you are paying for yourself and probably another 10 players or more.
These annoyances are things like bag space, or making some duneons or areas or classes or races unavailable, or making your rate of gold, item, or experience gain less. Or it could be that you can buy points to make time-based tasks like crafting finish instantly. There are literally hundreds of ways to monetize things, and most are not just cosmetic. If a developer relied purely on the cosmetic, not enough people would be motivated to pay.
I would rather play a game where everyone pays the VERY reasonable price of $10-15 per month to get equal, full access to everything. I do not like supporting others, I do not like gating content and such behind cash shops, and I do not like being annoyed in-game to buy things.
I genuinely hope F2P goes away soon. It's not a good fit for community driven games like MMO's. Sure it brings a few players back to a failing game for a month or two but other than that it's not really helping to advance the genre.
Just want to clear something up here...so you don't like B2P games? Did you buy Bioshock Infinite, Skyrim, or anything else along those lines? Those games are essentially B2P games with a shorter shelf life. They come out at full price. They provide content DLC for money. Hell, they give you less content then B2P MMOs do since they generally charge for additional content.
I think part of it is what I just mentioned. Games in general are starting to adopt to MMO style payment models. This is something the entire medium is facing, not just MMOs. The thing is about MMO players who are keen on paying a sub (and probably pay one already) feel like they need to defend it because they pay or have paid for it. I guess they feel they are in some sort of VIP lounge that only the cool kids who pay a sub can enter. Alot of these guys try to convince people, themselves included, that when you pay a subscription you get a higher quality product. This is simply not true anymore. Some would argue that it has never been true.
So let's clear something up, you think Skyrim should of been F2P? How would that work my friend, I would like to hear your brilliant plans on how to carry the F2P movement over to single player games.
I didn't realise we were debating single player games here.
I was talking about B2P games. Which are different then F2P games. And yes, singleplayer games are adapting a model similar to that of B2P games. I was proving a point which you clearly could not comprehend.
I genuinely hope F2P goes away soon. It's not a good fit for community driven games like MMO's. Sure it brings a few players back to a failing game for a month or two but other than that it's not really helping to advance the genre.
This warning coming from Mark Jacobs in a recent article he did which included his opinion on the unsustainable f2p model so many games are using.
"Camelot Unchained creator and long-time MMO veteran Mark Jacobs has warned of an impending free-to-play “apocalypse” in three to five years time, thanks to a rush towards unsustainable free-to-play models. He predicted to VG247 that developers will close and publishers stand to lose a lot of money.
“The whole free-to-play thing isn’t going away tomorrow,” Jacobs stressed, “but let’s just see what happens in three to five years – and I’m betting closer to three – where free-to-play will become just another model. Right now you’ve got everybody chasing it, going ‘Isn’t this great? Free to play, we’re going to make so much money’”.
Jacobs felt that many developers and publishers are chasing the free-to-play market in the hope that a small percentage of players will actually lay down money on micro-payment items. He doesn’t see it as an economically viable strategy."
That's a pretty damning article, so CU can never, ever go F2P now, not unless MJ eats his words. oh and alienating most of his potential player base is a bit bold.
I wonder if he may live to regret this statement if/when CU decides to introduce micro transactions.....F2P is a bad thing maybe, but a subscription based game with a cash shop?
LOL. I've already alienated a lot of my potential playerbase by saying:
1) No PvE leveling
2) Subscription-based only
3) It won't be a successor to Dark Age of Camelot
What I said in this article wasn't news to our backers. In terms of a cash shop, I'd rather shut the game down at that point.
I guess I find it troubling that you're willing to flush all of the money and time a community has invested in your business venture if it doesn't pan out how you want.
This is a major reason why I haven't donated to any Kickstarter yet. There are no investor protections past funding. If you were beholden to a publisher or publically traded company it wouldn't be as easy to throw away everything everyone else has put into the project.
It's what I, and I think many others, want as well. If it went to a cash shop, I'm pretty sure I'd quit based on my previous experiences with that type of system. So I have no problems with him saying that he'd rather shut down the game than compromise it that way.
Being beholden to publishers or shareholders that must make more and more money now is exactly what's broken many games in the past including DAoC and WAR.
Comments
There is a difference between being successful and hanging on by a thread. (Not talking about WoW or Eve on this list)
Your right in a way Alders, most new mmo's seem to play more like an FPS where you log on every few days and pew pew for a bit then log on to another one and pew pew there. I don't want that type of game, I want a game where I can invest time and play it with other like minded players over a longer period of time. It may be over for the masses so that is why I have to turn my attention to niche games now that focus on what I would like out of a game instead of the carousel type games that we have now.
that's cool, but what the creator charges you doesn't dictate if the game will be like this. take any of your hated f2p games, change the model and none of them magically becaome a for us, by us niche game that caters to your values. MJ is going to make such a game, that's good. but he's only saying what benefits his business in these interviews. payment model either way is a foolish rallying cry, and the overwhelming amount of shitty p2p mmo's should be pretty sobering evidence of that for you.
this site especially is pretty much 90% people disappointed with every mmo out.....and you guys were like this from as long as i can remember...early 2000's before even WoW launched.. virtually everything was p2p then. back then many people here were just as frothing mad about SWG and DAoC too.
So true. I have been saying this for years. MMORPG is not a good site to go to for positive reinforcement about a game you enjoy. Its a site where you go and argue with other people about games you enjoy
Most of the guys on this site hate everything.
What is your point? He can speak his mind on any topic just like anyone here that can type info into making an account.
Well its my choice to back this game, I think he can do it and am willing to dish out $110 to maybe see it made. Why is that threating to you that I want a game like this to be made?
I want a game that I can play for long time, there are plenty of games for you out there that you can jump around for a year playing a different F2P title each week.
It's not hanging on by a thread because of its payment model. It's hanging on by a thread because Funcom can't seem to deliver on promises made in the past 7 years.
Although I can see the argument,"For the money..........." eing a valid one. But the game would still be active had Funcom made good on things they said they would do and actually gave some meaningful content updates once in a while. It's not thebilling model that's the issue, it's the quality of the game that currently is. Although, I will admit, this is one of those two sided issues. They do have a cash shop. But IMO, that's done more damage to the game than they might admit.
I think we got our wires crossed here. What I meant was that most of the games on that list don't really keep producing content which is what I mean by "hanging on by a thread". It was not pointed at AO specifically.
Honestly part of the reason those games don't go F2P is because the conversion would not be worth it. It costs money to turn a game F2P as weird as that sounds. If those games barely update the game as it is, it would be highly unlikely they could switch models.
@ Fearum.
you're literally arguing something that i'm not. i'm saying that if you want a game you can play for a long time that's fine, but the payment model won't dictate that as evidenced by this whole genre since its infancy.
Remember guys, most of you anit-f2p guys in this topic were beating your chests about it before mark came along and lifting up Funcom and TRION as your champions cause they were basically saying the same shit in a roundabout way. not long ago at all. you're not without a good game to play because f2p, it's because most released suck and they happen to take a while to release.
True, because people actually like the game. A concept that a few people here don't really understand it seems. People want stability and a game they can play with familiar people. Yes there is room for F2P/B2P games, I don't like them and no matter how much bitching others will do I still will not like them, but saying a game will fail just off the pay model alone is pretty asinine.
Debating pay models is fun and all but it all falls on the actual game to win over fans, if it can't it will fail.
Just want to clear something up here...so you don't like B2P games? Did you buy Bioshock Infinite, Skyrim, or anything else along those lines? Those games are essentially B2P games with a shorter shelf life. They come out at full price. They provide content DLC for money. Hell, they give you less content then B2P MMOs do since they generally charge for additional content.
I think part of it is what I just mentioned. Games in general are starting to adopt to MMO style payment models. This is something the entire medium is facing, not just MMOs. The thing is about MMO players who are keen on paying a sub (and probably pay one already) feel like they need to defend it because they pay or have paid for it. I guess they feel they are in some sort of VIP lounge that only the cool kids who pay a sub can enter. Alot of these guys try to convince people, themselves included, that when you pay a subscription you get a higher quality product. This is simply not true anymore. Some would argue that it has never been true.
While I agree with this, I think it still goes back to buying quality. Many games wouldn't recoup much going f2p simply because they are crap at any price. Free s**t is still s**t.
But at the same time, if a company had an absolute smash hit on their hands and one that had long term objectives and people wanted to continuously play month after month, then a sub is justifiable. Unfortunately, there just isn't such a game out there at this time.
I don't think "F2p" is going anywhere, and I think it has it's place in the market.
However I also think thke "f2p" market can over-saturate (and perhaps that is what Mark is getting at) where you have so many F2p games an dthey are all nickel and diming people, people will eventually get tired of it and might want to go back to paying just 10 or so bucks /montha nd getting EVERYTHING in the game with no nickel and diming or being "cut off" from bank slots and all this other stuff.
I think the market is big enough to support both types, and as a smart businessman I would not put all my eggs in one basket so to speak.
Isn't that like the pot calling the kettle black. He may as well have titled the article "I'm doing a sub game and my Kickstarter isn't going the way I hoped so crank up the propaganda machine."
I love the arrogance of Mark Jacobs on this one. I'm really sorry, but there are a whole hell of a lot of people with a whole hell of a lot more experience and a much better grasp on current industry models that are pushing out F2P games. Sure, there will be some F2P games that fail, but I'm really sorry, Camelot Unchained is a perfect example of why a Sub game isn't sustainable in the current market and I'm sure Mark Jacobs will be breathing a sigh of relief when he doesn't have to support those $1/year subs years down the road. How is THAT!!!! a sustainable business model?
Crazkanuk
----------------
Azarelos - 90 Hunter - Emerald
Durnzig - 90 Paladin - Emerald
Demonicron - 90 Death Knight - Emerald Dream - US
Tankinpain - 90 Monk - Azjol-Nerub - US
Brindell - 90 Warrior - Emerald Dream - US
----------------
So let's clear something up, you think Skyrim should of been F2P? How would that work my friend, I would like to hear your brilliant plans on how to carry the F2P movement over to single player games.
I didn't realise we were debating single player games here.
Mark Jacobs is an idiot if he actually believes any of thsoe things, let alone actually said it. For the sake of argument I will just assume he actually said it so to this I will reply with the greatest statement about F2P EVER!
A question was asked to Jack Emmert about F2P at the GenCon 2012 D&D Digital here is a link, starts at the 10:34 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5QFqtpWO1s
If anyone knows me I am a big comicbook fan, I spend alot of money on Comic Books, over $500, Some people only buy 1 comic per month. Some dont spend anything but instead just watch TV but the key is if I am into Comic Books I can easily spend $500 and thats what we we are trying to do with Neverwinter. If you enjoy the game, we are not making anyone pay, but there will be avenues for me to spend money because I enjoy it.
Bascially he is saying, there are plenty of people who wish to spend on something they enjoy, it is human nature to do so and this is exactly what the F2P does. It allows those who want to spend $hundreds$ a month on the game and can afford it the opportunity to invest in their passions, their Hobbies and their wants. Human nature is to aquire things we enjoy and this is the basis for F2P and it will never ever go anywhere.
I think MJ only says these things because he realizes his game is going to be a sub based game that is only going to get 50k subscriptions. Niche as it is, that is his perrogative, but happily F2P is not going anywhere, its the P2P that is in serious jeopardy here Mr. jacobs.
Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!
Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!
Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!
Except a comic book is an actual physical thing, not just pixels online. If that floats your boat, more power to ya.
I personally don't care about the business model. What I really don't like however is having an out of game shop where you can buy stuff you can't get within the game (aka cash shop). This concept needs to go once and for all, it stinks.
I have a feeling what MJ is possibly referring to is the fact that the f2p model right now is like the new west of the business world. Crazy crap is going on like real online money, flat out gambling and pretty much online businesses being made within games themselves at times. Most of this has nearly zero regulation and one huge universal truth is that when countries find out real unaccounted money is changing hands out side of their control they crack the f$ck down on it to get their piece of the pie and ensure businesses are bound to local governance.
If you think the USA sits by and watches companies and players throwing real money around especially money that crosses boarders without regulation and think nothing of it you are incredibly naive. The USA is the hard ass country on the planet when it comes to money crossing their boarders. The interenet is the next and current battlegound for this sort of thing. I can only see more regulation coming to balance protection of customer, business and government. Regulation = restrictions.
You stay sassy!
There are two fundamental problems with any F2P game:
1.) The small minority pays for the vast majority
2.) The game is designed around inconveniencing you enough to pay
To the first point, it is well established that "whales," users that spend $50, $100, maybe $500+ per month bear a lot of the cost of the game. The majority of players may spend a few bucks, but many never do. They play for free, forever. The whales are willing to pay a premium for premium treatment, but it is unhealthy to rely on a few very spendy patrons to support everyone.
The second point is even more crucial. A subscription game's goal is to keep you entertained enough to keep you subscribed. They need to earn your subscription each month, and when they fail to do that, they fail to get your money.
A F2P game needs to keep you entertained, too, but almost as important, they need to keep you inconvenienced. If the game had absolutely no restrictions for playing freely, few would buy anything. So, the developers design annoyances right into the game. These range from flat-out content restrictions, to time-based restrictions, to perk restrictions. Their goal is to hook you by making the game available for free, getting you playing, but then making it so progression is either very hard or very annoying witout buying things. And once you start buying, the cost can add up to far, far more than $15 per month. It has to, since not everyone pays. If you are paying, you are paying for yourself and probably another 10 players or more.
These annoyances are things like bag space, or making some duneons or areas or classes or races unavailable, or making your rate of gold, item, or experience gain less. Or it could be that you can buy points to make time-based tasks like crafting finish instantly. There are literally hundreds of ways to monetize things, and most are not just cosmetic. If a developer relied purely on the cosmetic, not enough people would be motivated to pay.
I would rather play a game where everyone pays the VERY reasonable price of $10-15 per month to get equal, full access to everything. I do not like supporting others, I do not like gating content and such behind cash shops, and I do not like being annoyed in-game to buy things.
Subscription based communities are no better.
I was talking about B2P games. Which are different then F2P games. And yes, singleplayer games are adapting a model similar to that of B2P games. I was proving a point which you clearly could not comprehend.
Well said.
What happens when you log off your characters????.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
Dark Age of Camelot
It's what I, and I think many others, want as well. If it went to a cash shop, I'm pretty sure I'd quit based on my previous experiences with that type of system. So I have no problems with him saying that he'd rather shut down the game than compromise it that way.
Being beholden to publishers or shareholders that must make more and more money now is exactly what's broken many games in the past including DAoC and WAR.