The current f2p games are failed games that had no choice but to turn f2p as last resort. With the exception of gw2. The good f2p games have yet to be released. TESO, Wildstar, FF where years in development before this f2p hype started and simply couldn't switch to f2p model cause their investers won't put up with f2p.
So why call it the Rejuvenation of Subscriptions cause these games will be released soon? Kinda silly...
Like the other MMORPG.com article lauding a 'come-back' for subscriptions, there is no 'rejuvination'. Subscriptions at launch haven't gone anywhere. EQNext Landmark is the only major title to announce a f2p model at launch. Every other MMO has launched, or will launch, with subscription model in place.
And it makes sense really. These games can always switch to f2p later, but doing the opposite is unprecedented, and likely unworkable.
SOE can afford to launch some of their games as F2P from the start. They have a bevy of MMOs under their belt, many with a subscription option as well as the Station Pass option.
"There is no logical reason why players will buy these P2P games and sub to them when everyone knows they will be F2P a year after launch."
Sure...
These games would all be facing financial ruin if players behaved logically. However, pure financial logic does not apply here. Millions of gamers will buy these games and sub to them, because they want to play when it launches !
Just like millions upon millions of people change their cellphones when a new shiny model is released. They have to have the latest thing, simply because it is the latest.
So my question is - if f2p games are making so much money why are major publishers going p2p? Maybe the answer is that f2p games are NOT making the big bucks. Example: GW2. Look at the contribution to NCSoft's profit last quarter (the figures are on this web site). GW2 is nowhere near the top money maker - as good a game as it is.
I am sure that all three of the games mentioned will eventually go f2p. That seems to be the life cycle of mmos now. Release as p2p, convert to f2p, put in maintenance mode, and finally kill it.
I think that there are a lot of assumptions being made here... some I agree with, some I dont. Lets start with what I can agree with:
Final Fantasy XIV seems like it was built to be sustained by a monthly sub. It looks like the developers are in this for the long haul, and are comitted to making it work. This comittment can only garner respect from everyone, and I hope that this game is around for a long time.
TESO doesnt really know what they are doing. This is their first MMO and they 'think' that their userbase will respond to a sub only option. They are likely to be incorrect, and will have to adjust if the numbers do not come through quickly. This is likely to come as a quick change in business model... or even outright failure of the product if they do not adapt quickly.
Wildstar wants a monthly sub to work... but will be prepared if if doesnt. NCSoft will not let them flounder with a failed product, and will have made sure that they can change quickly if needed. I see them as the most prepared to make the maximum money with P2P then convert to F2P for the long haul.
Now, as for what I do NOT agree with:
Monthly subs are STILL the most common method of monetization in PC based MMO's. F2P titles most commonly use this as the preferred method. Anyone that doesnt realize this is not aware of what is happening in the market.
I do not think that anyone (other than maybe Wildstar) is looking to bait and switch. They all want the P2P model to work, but are set in their ways. Bad decisions are often made for good reasons... It is how you deal with the results that truly matter.
I Suspect Wildstar has 6 months before it drops subscriptions and ends the wild cash grab which players still seem readyto fall for (di SWTOR teach the MMO community nothing). If that does happen I hope they seriously consider going buy 2 play with digital expansion packs which I think is an overlooked model that can work provided they can add fresh & most importantly innovative content. Innovative content is important because if players can do more with the content provided then you dont have so much pressure to rush out more and more content.
Also on innovation neither of these games really innovates enough to drag the pleb hoard away from WoW.
all the big hype new MMOs will be released as a P2P subscription its how they make the money back from hyping the game up with all the advertisment but after 1 year they start to lose money on the lack of numbers to cover the cost of upkeep and server cost so they go free to breath new life into the game its just a common practice the only 2 companies that will always stay P2P forever are sony entertainment and electronic arts (Mythic).
ESO will be pirated software and will be hacked within a year to make private servers anyways so they won't make much money by staying Subs.
Originally posted by Nephaerius Just going to sit these one's out until they go Free 2 Play. I'm sure we've all learned our lesson here.
Is the lesson "Don't make quality games for people who will go out of their way to ruin your company because they think it should be free"?
It may be the lesson for some, but speaking for myself, the lesson is that I'd rather not pay for content that I'll never use. Stated another way, I want to pay for only the content I'll use. Thus a f2p model like DDO allows me to buy modules that I can use account wide for solo or small groups of friends, but I'm not forced to pay for, and thus subsidize, raid or pvp which I don't participate in.
So my question is - if f2p games are making so much money why are major publishers going p2p? Maybe the answer is that f2p games are NOT making the big bucks. Example: GW2. Look at the contribution to NCSoft's profit last quarter (the figures are on this web site). GW2 is nowhere near the top money maker - as good a game as it is.
I am sure that all three of the games mentioned will eventually go f2p. That seems to be the life cycle of mmos now. Release as p2p, convert to f2p, put in maintenance mode, and finally kill it.
Because developers are always hopeful that they'll catch lightning in a bottle and get WoW-scale subscriptions. They can always go to f2p later. No game has done the reverse as far as I know.
The problem with a sub is that people can avoid paying it. They buy the game, play the content then unsub. 12 months later maybe come back for the xpac, play for another month and then unsub. So if the developer needs - to use the numbers in the article - 1M subs for 2 years to recover the costs of the game then they have a problem. And having a sub will limit sales.
Back when UO/EQ1/AC were launched the sub was intended to pay for the server infrastructure: servers, server software, processors, staff, heating, cooling etc. This was a major, on-going cost. Then, as now, people would only pay so much for a game. Hence the sub: it was a service fee. Additional content was via paid expansions.
Server costs fell. Grumblings started. What was the sub for?
Along came NCSoft with CoH; they announced a higher sub but with regular content updates. WoW followed. For these games the sub was now a combination service + new product fee.
Mythic put their sub up and talked the talk but they just needed the money and SoE carried on charging for new content. EQ2 had bombed. For these games the sub was now about filling financial black holes as well. A ticket to Easy Street. Fleecing the customer by charging the same as other games but not providing the same return.
WoW blossomed and created the myth that subs = huge profits.
GW1 launched. Free-to-play forever. It was a big hit and created the myth that F2P = huge profits.
LoL launched in 2009, cemented the F2P = huge profit myth whilst in reality creating a new myth: that free-to-Buy = huge profits.
A lot of other mmos "struggled": DDO, MXO, AoC, WAR, etc etc At least the failures ended the myth that mmos were immortal.
More recently Zynga put a dent in the F2P = huge profits. For a while however it was feeding the hype.
Developers need to recover their costs and have the incentive of making a profit. A sub will not guarantee that they do. Nor will Free-to-Play or Free-to-Buy. They should go back to basics. Recover the cost of their game from the box price - easier to now with online distribution. Charge a small sub or annual membership to cover the cost of the service. Offfer expansions - large and small - for a cost. As games on Steam do say. (I could say via a cash shop but that gives the wrong idea).
There are other "non-mmo" games that have the same issues: initial product cost; server costs - not uncommon these days; cost of providing new content. B3 is just one example of a very successful game that has the same issues. No mandatory sub but a voluntary premium membership. Seems the right way to go to me.
Great article! As much as I hate to admit it, he's right. Those in WoW, who've been there for years are most likely content to stay. I mean, I don't know much, but it doesn't seem the game has changed too drastically for them to be pulled enough by any other game out there when they've invested years into the characters they've played and the world Blizzard has created. I mean, I've been playing SWTOR for almost two years now, and not only liking the game, but the thought of stopping and moving to another after what I've invested just seems ludicrous. So, I think he's right on.
I for one won't be paying any money to Wildstar, will only be paying/playing TESO if my boyfriend does, and am the most interested in Final Fantasy 14 : A Realm Reborn, which I'd prefer being buy to play like Guild Wars, but no one ever uses that revenue model ><.
Comments
The good f2p games have yet to be released.
TESO, Wildstar, FF where years in development before this f2p hype started and simply couldn't switch to f2p model cause their investers won't put up with f2p.
So why call it the Rejuvenation of Subscriptions cause these games will be released soon? Kinda silly...
https://www.facebook.com/FUtilez ||| https://twitter.com/FUtilez ||| https://www.youtube.com/futilezguild
SOE can afford to launch some of their games as F2P from the start. They have a bevy of MMOs under their belt, many with a subscription option as well as the Station Pass option.
"There is no logical reason why players will buy these P2P games and sub to them when everyone knows they will be F2P a year after launch."
Sure...
These games would all be facing financial ruin if players behaved logically. However, pure financial logic does not apply here. Millions of gamers will buy these games and sub to them, because they want to play when it launches !
Just like millions upon millions of people change their cellphones when a new shiny model is released. They have to have the latest thing, simply because it is the latest.
So my question is - if f2p games are making so much money why are major publishers going p2p? Maybe the answer is that f2p games are NOT making the big bucks. Example: GW2. Look at the contribution to NCSoft's profit last quarter (the figures are on this web site). GW2 is nowhere near the top money maker - as good a game as it is.
I am sure that all three of the games mentioned will eventually go f2p. That seems to be the life cycle of mmos now. Release as p2p, convert to f2p, put in maintenance mode, and finally kill it.
I think that there are a lot of assumptions being made here... some I agree with, some I dont. Lets start with what I can agree with:
Final Fantasy XIV seems like it was built to be sustained by a monthly sub. It looks like the developers are in this for the long haul, and are comitted to making it work. This comittment can only garner respect from everyone, and I hope that this game is around for a long time.
TESO doesnt really know what they are doing. This is their first MMO and they 'think' that their userbase will respond to a sub only option. They are likely to be incorrect, and will have to adjust if the numbers do not come through quickly. This is likely to come as a quick change in business model... or even outright failure of the product if they do not adapt quickly.
Wildstar wants a monthly sub to work... but will be prepared if if doesnt. NCSoft will not let them flounder with a failed product, and will have made sure that they can change quickly if needed. I see them as the most prepared to make the maximum money with P2P then convert to F2P for the long haul.
Now, as for what I do NOT agree with:
Monthly subs are STILL the most common method of monetization in PC based MMO's. F2P titles most commonly use this as the preferred method. Anyone that doesnt realize this is not aware of what is happening in the market.
I do not think that anyone (other than maybe Wildstar) is looking to bait and switch. They all want the P2P model to work, but are set in their ways. Bad decisions are often made for good reasons... It is how you deal with the results that truly matter.
I Suspect Wildstar has 6 months before it drops subscriptions and ends the wild cash grab which players still seem readyto fall for (di SWTOR teach the MMO community nothing). If that does happen I hope they seriously consider going buy 2 play with digital expansion packs which I think is an overlooked model that can work provided they can add fresh & most importantly innovative content. Innovative content is important because if players can do more with the content provided then you dont have so much pressure to rush out more and more content.
Also on innovation neither of these games really innovates enough to drag the pleb hoard away from WoW.
all the big hype new MMOs will be released as a P2P subscription its how they make the money back from hyping the game up with all the advertisment but after 1 year they start to lose money on the lack of numbers to cover the cost of upkeep and server cost so they go free to breath new life into the game its just a common practice the only 2 companies that will always stay P2P forever are sony entertainment and electronic arts (Mythic).
ESO will be pirated software and will be hacked within a year to make private servers anyways so they won't make much money by staying Subs.
Is the lesson "Don't make quality games for people who will go out of their way to ruin your company because they think it should be free"?
It may be the lesson for some, but speaking for myself, the lesson is that I'd rather not pay for content that I'll never use. Stated another way, I want to pay for only the content I'll use. Thus a f2p model like DDO allows me to buy modules that I can use account wide for solo or small groups of friends, but I'm not forced to pay for, and thus subsidize, raid or pvp which I don't participate in.
Because developers are always hopeful that they'll catch lightning in a bottle and get WoW-scale subscriptions. They can always go to f2p later. No game has done the reverse as far as I know.
The problem with a sub is that people can avoid paying it. They buy the game, play the content then unsub. 12 months later maybe come back for the xpac, play for another month and then unsub. So if the developer needs - to use the numbers in the article - 1M subs for 2 years to recover the costs of the game then they have a problem. And having a sub will limit sales.
Back when UO/EQ1/AC were launched the sub was intended to pay for the server infrastructure: servers, server software, processors, staff, heating, cooling etc. This was a major, on-going cost. Then, as now, people would only pay so much for a game. Hence the sub: it was a service fee. Additional content was via paid expansions.
Server costs fell. Grumblings started. What was the sub for?
Along came NCSoft with CoH; they announced a higher sub but with regular content updates. WoW followed. For these games the sub was now a combination service + new product fee.
Mythic put their sub up and talked the talk but they just needed the money and SoE carried on charging for new content. EQ2 had bombed. For these games the sub was now about filling financial black holes as well. A ticket to Easy Street. Fleecing the customer by charging the same as other games but not providing the same return.
WoW blossomed and created the myth that subs = huge profits.
GW1 launched. Free-to-play forever. It was a big hit and created the myth that F2P = huge profits.
LoL launched in 2009, cemented the F2P = huge profit myth whilst in reality creating a new myth: that free-to-Buy = huge profits.
A lot of other mmos "struggled": DDO, MXO, AoC, WAR, etc etc At least the failures ended the myth that mmos were immortal.
More recently Zynga put a dent in the F2P = huge profits. For a while however it was feeding the hype.
Developers need to recover their costs and have the incentive of making a profit. A sub will not guarantee that they do. Nor will Free-to-Play or Free-to-Buy. They should go back to basics. Recover the cost of their game from the box price - easier to now with online distribution. Charge a small sub or annual membership to cover the cost of the service. Offfer expansions - large and small - for a cost. As games on Steam do say. (I could say via a cash shop but that gives the wrong idea).
There are other "non-mmo" games that have the same issues: initial product cost; server costs - not uncommon these days; cost of providing new content. B3 is just one example of a very successful game that has the same issues. No mandatory sub but a voluntary premium membership. Seems the right way to go to me.