Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
P2P>vs F2P/B2P A new trend ?
NeoCroX997
Member UncommonPosts: 28
I want to start off firstly about it was something I have always wondered. What comes through ones head when a huge game going from a subscription based to a F2P-model. With the same subscription options but a chance to play it for free with restrictions in the content and gameplay more or less.
I noticed about when Everquest 2 and lord of the rings online began to offer players a F2P implemented into the game. Ever since then many other huge mmo´s have went into that business model like a chain reaction within a short time of notice. There are a lot of different explanations why a certain company does a move like they do. How do we react to to it and what causes the reason for companies to drive into another path.
Lets compare the situation like the new released game Neverwinter is a totally free game to start with. Guild wars that have been B2P ever since the first game. And The secret world must be one of the few games going from a subscription to a B2P-model. Swtor was only out for 1 year before it became F2P. What makes them rushing so fast for a sudden?
Maybe you can help me with my questions 
?
What´s good or bad with a P2P having a F2P built inside the game?
Optional side leading questions:
>> Developers want have make their game more attractive for new players?
>> Is it a signal the game is about to die and is the final state before closing down?
>> Cash shops> Are we afraid of its influence unbalancing the gameplay?
>> The restrictions makes us more willing to pay in cash shop rather than purchasing a sub?
>> Anything else/ Your opinions ?
From P2P to F2P/B2P?
Optional side leading questions:
>> Why is the B2P not used as often for a subscription based mmo?
>> Is it just all about earning extra money with cash shops?
>> Are we more used to F2P, how it works and what we can expect?
>> Is it a trend because of the competition versus developers between?
>> B2P is not very economic for mmo gaming industry?
>> Anything else/ Your opinions ?
Comments
This is a hard topic for me to participate in without sudden deranged outbreaks of "kill it with fire!"
If a publisher is innovating on the business model, I find it hard to believe they have my best interests in mind. I believe that a cash shop creates a fundamentally adversarial relationship between the developers and the players that is destructive to any shared sense of purpose.
From Farmville's explosive success on, it's been easy to see what the allure of cash shops is to a game publisher - there are people who will spent a *lot* of money when you nickel and dime them. I have to admit that I honestly expected the whole model to be a fad that burned out as consumer naivety wore off. However, although Zynga itself may be starting to wobble, the basic model of the cash shop seems to have become almost ubiquitous in gaming.
So when I look the revenue data that's public out there and imagine myself as the publisher of a subscription game, I too would be awfully tempted to just take all the diehard holdouts like myself and throw us under the bus. But that that doesn't change my attitude as a consumer that there is no way I should ever go anywhere near a game with a cash shop. Putting those together, I look at any attempt to slide a cash shop up beside me with an extreme (but I think warranted) level of paranoia.
So to be honest, I'm beginning to start casting an eye towards eccentric independent developers and experimental games like Minecraft as a potential escape route Or perhaps I'll just retire from MMO-playing. It's been a nice run, but perhaps it's time for me to do something productive with my time.
Since many P2P players still continue to play after transition to freemium, and some of them openly admit that after transition they shell MORE money on game - I am not surprised that devs go this route. There are even more naive people - ones that stick to the game or even start to play new f2p games and at same time complain how f2p is bad.
Sorry - that's cretin behaviour and I am not surprised at all - that game companies don't give a shit about their whining, after all they tell one thing and do something opposite.
Microtranactions will just start coming in full force. This just started contrary to popular belief.
I don't see hope for online gaming and especially for mmorpg's. I surely can put my time I will free to a better use.buy to play. Like guild wars 2 . You buy the game and can play for "free" after.
As a kid, when you played Ghost in the Graveyard, or the board game, Atlantis, or Nightmare, did you ever think about money?
There is no immersion in F2P for me. All I see are pop ups to spend money. No level playing field. Subscriptions will always be more beneficial for players, and games that have subs most likely shows that the devs care about the players. Because it says to the player "Our game is good enough for a sub, it's quality and we're putting you before your wallet".
From my limited perspective anyway. I can't play F2P mmorpgs, can't get into them. I can play league though, it's not a mmorpg.
What?...just what? My brother's a programmer by trade as well and I don't see him acting like he's some know-it-all, the be all end all of any topic like you do so kindly quit it as I doubt you'd really want me to start asking his opinion on the matter.
Also those people who deserve "name and shaming" in your opinion are about 60-80% of your gods damned consumer base, we can't all afford to pay monthly fees due to more pressing concerns that are beyond a programming demiurg like yourself it would seem but if we see a good game offering a good deal we'll take it (I've bought both GW2 and TSW these past 8 months) and if you think shunning that large a part of your consumer base for your own petty reasons is a good idea then you really do not deserve to get paid.
To anyone else who took what he said as a justification for hate against free players: We're all around, we build up wikis, we support in-game economies where possible, some of us know how to play the game well enough to give you good PUGs and if not some others at least know how to make you laugh losing. We're not all cheap freeloaders, in fact most are just players who've either hit hard times, are not in a position to afford a monthly fee (ya know people need money for other stuff sometimes) or just people too young to have a job and to nice to ask their parents for money monthly ( I know, sounds like a fairytale, speaking from experience here though, main reason I've learned that few games are worth a monthly sub and those that are are the free ones nowadays ironically ).
PS: Just in case anyone missed the pronouns thus far: I am a free player, the only P2P game I play is EVE-Online and that's after years of struggling to get up to the point where I can pay with plexes because I would play 2-3 months once every few years otherwise. I make it my personal task to help whenever I can in the F2P games I do play ( really fun pushing a tortoise tank destroyer up a hill with a t34-2 in WoT... not really but if it helps him and the team I do it) because while I cannot pay in cold hard cash for the games I play in a regular fashion I can make damn well sure everyone else around me has a good time and maybe one or two of them has money to spare, if not that's not really any issue either.
its all about the money.. most of these games have failed to get the wow numbers they wanted and slowly start loosing money.. they see some companies doing well and making some cash with the f2p model and bam they all jump on the band wagon... but like most band wagons its usually too late by the time you get on it lol..
The irony in all your ramblings is that the reasons MMO's and other online games are going the f2p route is because they like to pay their programmers and keep games updated and improving. Its just you are so full of negative emotion that you're twisting your thoughts to justify those feelings. Calm down and think about about this properly, this move is not about greed its about making many MMO's viable. Companies do not change their whole payment models on a whim they change them because market forces force them to. The world is not about us v them like many feel on this site, profit is a dirty word around here but you seem to think that making a game free is just forcing you to pay for the free players, have you costed what it actually costs to play a f2p game fully and can you show me your findings on it costing significantly more than p2p which hasn't had a rise in fees for over 9 years? this last point is the main reason companies have looked for alternative payment schemes and b2p and f2p are here to stay. So maybe if you don't wise up your gaming days are over as even SP games will go this way eventually.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
I agree. Dropping the caustic comments, insults, and made up data will go a long way toward making this a far more productive discussion.
@OP, the adoption of F2P isn't really a new trend. It's been going on for about four years now, with the biggest burst of adoption occurring in 2011 as quite a few sub games brought in F2P to bolster revenue and revitalize their game. An overview of those first few years can be found here.
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
That's an often overlooked part of it. Consumer bias will normally assume a product/service at the accepted price point is equal to the others at that price point and assume a product/service at a lower price to be inferior. However, when a product/service is offered at a higher price it comes under comparative scrutiny that an MMO's marketing team would just become belabored with justifying.
Switching to a different model that can generate higher overall revenue (not necessarily average per paying user but average per user) is the most viable option in today's market.
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
That is just you.
Many players .. millions of them by the latest research .. are playing F2P games.
I enjoy them. Oh, i don't think about money .. they are free.
Since you say "probably" - which means without much doubt, almost certainly or to be expected - could you share some of the game companies where you feel that statement is true?
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 would rather call swtor a hybrid model, since someone mentioned they actually have 500k sub right now. 500k sub for a f2p game, pretty amazing.
The thing with b2p and GW2 in specific is GW2 have a cashshop, and GW2 cashshop is very similar to every other f2p cashshop. The only difference is in GW2 getting the best gear is very easy. So you won't get into the pay 2 win issue.
Exactly and because companies have had to look for better ways to improve income they have opened out their games to a potentially wider audience and a better churn of players which equals better income, this then allows the game to survive and grow rather than contract. This all goes back to the Time - Money equation p2p games of yore require lots of time, especially as they age, so you are gating off the game for any new blood, f2p democratises the game allowing players late to the party to catch up. Though all many players see is prices rising and their blood boils over and you have posts like Greengreen.
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
It's too bad greenreen got a hold of your post because it might be the most sensible anti-F2P post I've ever seen.
I do wonder why you think that P2P MMOs have your best interest in mind. Or at least, that's what you seem to be implying with your second paragraph. For instance, Bobby Kotick is now worth approximately two billion dollars and regularly gets over four million dollars in bonuses per year from Activision Blizzard. It's not until something goes wrong that they actually start thinking about spending some of that ridiculously high subscription income on the actual game that you are paying $180/year + expansions for.
A long time ago, I used to buy into the idea that my subscription money needed to be paid so that the game I was playing could survive and grow while I played it. This does happen of course, but it also appears obvious to me that only a tiny portion of that money is actually going towards whatever it is I'm playing. The lion's share of the subscription fees I pay (I am subbed to 2 games right now) appears to be going towards profits and future projects. Trion built three other games using subscription money - games that they will then use to fund other future products. In the end, a respectable portion your subscription isn't ending up in the actual game you are playing.
Subscriptions games have always seemed just as exploitive (if not more) as F2P/Freemium/B2P games to me. Subscriptions used to be a mandatory price tag for a game to survive and keep the developers paid. But that time has passed now that 300 - 500 thousand people is the new normal for most big MMORPGs. Preference for subscriptions is one thing, but pretending that subscription games are more virtuous, I think, is a mistake.
Hell, yeah !
Especially if you can actively market that expected increase in revenue as "a benefit to the players"...
"Look, you can now play our game absolutely FREE !"
"And we make more money than ever before !"
It's perfect, everybody wins...
I think that in most (not all) F2P/Freemium/B2P models, everybody does win. F2P depends on having larger amounts of people playing in order to make more money than they used to. The average spent per user in a F2P game is a good deal lower than a subscription fee game. If they made more money on the same amount of players I might be able to see your point, but they are making less money per player in F2P models.
I'm guessing that emoticon is your way of indicating that you think I'm crazy. Fair enough. Could you share why you feel that is not the most viable option for developers at this moment?
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
It makes no difference if the game needs to bought first or is just downloaded for free. Both have them same goal in mind, and that is to provide a great game.
F2P is great. I am a huge fan of both Aion and Guild Wars 2. I spend more on the games now than I ever would have with a subscription. That's ok though because I get something I want or need to get even with those full time gamers. With Wow losing so many people, I am surprised Blizzard doesn't fix it to F2P. I would then play it again.
As for the thought on buying the game to play for free, like Guild Wars 2, it can help stop bots a bit. However, as in Guild Wars 2, it doesn't seem to help. It could aslo be B2P so you get a little something special to start with. Like I got 3 days head start, but is that really worth it? Since they now sell the deluxe in their shop, which gives us all the stuff I got back then.
Its always been common sense to me that your sub pays for the ongoing running of the company and that includes future projects. This is why Turbine had to think about their pricing model as they were not earning enough to secure the future of the company as LotRO was losing subs not gaining them. Thus Freemium was born and the revolution started, this is all born from the fact of having a virtual monopoly in the genre fixing prices, its one of the reasons monopolies are bad. Market forces have brought about this change and the common misguided view that is often quoted and again its there in Maplestones post, is that they are just doing it to nickle and dime you, basically its a scam and you are mugs for falling for it. But that is ridiculous and just comes from fear of change, these arguments went on when MMO's first started to charge monthly and probably by the same people.
So in short, companies have to earn enough money that helps to secure the future of the company that includes future projects as they consume money not generate it. F2p enables them to earn more money than with $15, but subs are still only $15 dollars because of a virtual monopoly holding prices down, for over 9 years, while costs having risen, so really subs should be $20+ these days or maybe more. This is overlooked by many people and is the root of much fear. Making MMO's costs a damn site more to produce than they did a decade ago and fees to play MMO's have to rise as well but if you monetise the wealthy who have the disposable income you can subsidise the less well off.
Competition in the market will lead to fair f2p models and better value all round. This is already happening and the fact you can spend as much or as little of your income on gaming is better than having a flat fixed fee, this is why we don't have very high income tax and no VAT or corporate tax, you spread the tax burden throughout society so the wealthy subsidise the poor. (though I know this is simplifying things somewhat and big corporations get away without pay huge tax bills)
This doom and gloom thread was brought to you by Chin Up the new ultra high caffeine soft drink for gamers who just need that boost of happiness after a long forum session.
The answer to all of this is simple: The games are allowing players to hit max level too fast. Developers are making it so that players breeze through the low level content, (the content with the most amount of work put into it) and hit end game, get bored, and stop playing. Developers only choice is to attract more players from lower down the barrel. You know, the players who only play games when they are free?
If it took players two years to hit max level and get all your raid armor (instead of one year) then the companies would make a lot more money and keep the subscription model going.
I played WoW up until WotLK, played RoM for 2 years and now Rift.
I am F2P player. I support games when I feel they deserve my money and I want the items enough.
I don't troll, and I don't take kindly to trolls.
Not if most players quit and go to other games that do not require two years to hit max levels.