I am fan of P2P and B2P. Because I am a fan of funding. More funding equals a better chance at quality, though there are no guarantees.
I do feel a huge amount of MMO budgets are spent trying to make MMOs live up to solo game standards. The perfectly polished launch, because MMOs don't get updates you know, they have to be perfect. The top end graphics, when trying to compete with a solo game is like riding through a swamp of lag and expecting to keep up with a solo game on dry land. Voice acting, solo games have it so MMOs must have it and so on.
Who says that is not the right business model since MMOs have to compete with SP games (and other entertainment) for consumer dollars.
May be they should just build solo games, and just expand the MP part a little to be more MMO like, not unlike what D3 has done.
So what gives an MMO the edge? Well it can be better than the rest or cheaper than the rest.
The large expansion of F2Ps has actually shifted the genre from competition with Sub MMOs to competition amongst F2P mmos.
What does this mean? Well it cant get a whole lot cheaper...can it? A large segment of playerbase already plays for free. this approach is bottoming out.
Therefore, even at F2P level we're soon going to enter an arms race of who can make it better again.
Sadly this isn't a clear-cut path of quality. Quite the opposite. Since F2P mmos value whales, the next stage of evolution is clearly P2W.
When the P2W bubble bursts, the F2P market will completely deflate and we'll be back at accent on quality.
Under what business model will this happen? It's unclear. It probably will actually be F2P, really. In the end it won't matter, as the emphasis won't be on payment model.
Subscriptions are the Roman Empire. F2P are Egypt. (lots of stone grinding). We are now in year 1,000 AD. Neither looks very good...we'll see what they look like in another 1000 years.
I think WoW type subs with cash shop layers and free trails will become the norm because it makes the most sense. I'd like to see tiered subs.
I don't complain when subscription games come out, but I can honestly say that I doubt I'll ever pay a subscription again. The game would have to be some kind of genre defining incredible gem to even get me to consider it at this point. I guess I'm part of the "tiny minority" that spends money on f2p games I enjoy, and all my friends who play them just happen to be part of that same "tiny minority". I don't like the subscription model, I don't enjoy the hassle of closing and re-opening subscriptions when I game hop or take a break from gaming. I didn't like it back when hosting and server costs justified it, and I really don't like it now that they don't. I also believe that an active player has enough value to the company that even if they spend nothing in a cash shop asking for a subscription is insulting. I don't like being sold a product(box price) and then being told it's actually a service. I look at the value I got from Guild Wars for my dollars spent and judge each and every new game that comes out by that standard. I'm not going to scream at developers for not catering to me, or say stupid things like "this game uses my favorite payment method and by virtue of that is automatically good, unlike your games which are all bad". I'm just going to keep playing games I enjoy and voting with my wallet. At this point in my life, I work, I make good money, I don't lack anything I need, and I buy what I want. All a game developer has to do to get me to buy a subscription is make something that I actually think is worth giving them $135 or more to play for 6 months. Maybe some day a game developer will make me a subscription MMO that will give more fun for my dollar than the free to play ones are and get me to change my mind, but I doubt it.
More fun for your dollar? What other form of entertainment is cheaper than sub mmo? This month on my main mmo it came to about $0.30 / hour of entertainment! More fun for your dollar? Yeah ok that makes sense, pretty sure that is hard to beat for dollar/hr of entertainment.
I don't hate subscriptions, I hate how MMO developers who charge subscriptions use them. I'm having issues getting this in to a form that will make sense to other people, but I'll give it a shot. It's really only when you combine a retail box price with subscriptions that I get angry, and if you have the nerve to have a cash shop on top of that, I'm fighting mad, if you then turn around and charge subscribed players for a boxed expansion I think you are scum not worth spitting on.
Now, if you built your great MMO, and decided to go subscription, and because of that subscription you didn't have a cash shop, and any charge for your box directly translated to an equal or better amount of subscription time, I would think you were an honest company that I wanted to do business with. You're not trying to charge me multiple times for content I'm already subscribed to. I'll keep paying that subscription for complete access to your game, and you will continue adding quality stuff and maintaining a fun experience so I'll want to keep renewing my subscription.
If you sell me your game, and sell me the expansions, and don't charge me a subscription, we're cool too. You're not trying to sell me access to something I already purchased out right from you.
If you finance your game entirely through in game transactions, so long as anything non cosmetic in your game store is reasonably(meaning some, but not ridiculous RNG or grind) obtainable with effort put in to the game, we're also fine. I'll give you the money I think my experience was worth to me, and you'll keep adding quality stuff and maintaining a fun experience so I want to keep giving you money.
But if you want me to pay a retail box price to recoop your development costs in one go and then a subscription starting shortly after that, while attempting to charge me in a cash shop for cash shop exclusives, and expecting me to pay you additional money every time you add major content, you can go jump off a cliff.
Originally posted by Kyleran Well, in all fairness, GW2 proved you can create B2P MMOS, so many people see monthly subs or spendy cash shops as monetary grabs that really aren't based on providing players good value.
also Guild Wars Jeff Strain was an outspoken critic of sub fees
Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs.
It's not true – you know it, and they know it.
Gamers may buy the argument that your MMO requires a subscription fee, if you can tell them what they are getting for their money. This is the legacy of games like Guild Wars, Maple Story, and Silkroad Online, all of which introduced new business models into the MMO genre and were quite successful.
The subscription model is still perfectly viable, but the pain threshold is very low now. It's no secret that gamers don't want to pay a subscription fee. If you can convince them that your game offers enough value to justify it, more power to you! But be prepared to defend your decision, often and loudly, and back it up over the lifetime of your game.
I'm not sure if I missed it, but where in the GW2 cash shop does it provide you with p2w style items? I mean there's boosts, but it doesn't necessarily throw off the balance like a game that is all P2W like Age of Wushu.
More fun for your dollar? What other form of entertainment is cheaper than sub mmo?
Free to play MMO, of course. And also TV, web surfing, forum pvp ... there are lots of entertainment cheaper than sub MMOs.
Not sure where you get your tv and Internet but mine both cost way more than $15/month. As for f2p mmos please give me an example of truly f2p mmo where you don't spend more or equal to $15/month on its cash shop. These F2p mmos are not free these companies need to make money that's why they made these games. They didn't make them so the freeloaders can play them for free.
Netflix costs $8 a month .. cheaper than MMO.
Example .. Marvel Heroes. I finished the story content with TWO characters for 60 hours of fun without paying a dime. They are free if you don't pay .. and I am enjoying STO for free too.
And yes, they offer these games free to free loaders ... otherwise, how do you explain i am having tens of hours of free fun?
More fun for your dollar? What other form of entertainment is cheaper than sub mmo?
Free to play MMO, of course. And also TV, web surfing, forum pvp ... there are lots of entertainment cheaper than sub MMOs.
Not sure where you get your tv and Internet but mine both cost way more than $15/month. As for f2p mmos please give me an example of truly f2p mmo where you don't spend more or equal to $15/month on its cash shop. These F2p mmos are not free these companies need to make money that's why they made these games. They didn't make them so the freeloaders can play them for free.
Actually, yes, they did. Every player they get adds to the game community, and a thriving community encourages more players to join, who might potentially give them money, and if they don't they still add to the community, encouraging more people to join, and so on.
Subscriptions are only possible if the player believes that the company is doing them a favor by letting them play, when in reality it's entirely the other way around. I'm honestly amazed people are still willing to buy a game and then pay a recurring fee to play something they already purchased.
More fun for your dollar? What other form of entertainment is cheaper than sub mmo?
Free to play MMO, of course. And also TV, web surfing, forum pvp ... there are lots of entertainment cheaper than sub MMOs.
Not sure where you get your tv and Internet but mine both cost way more than $15/month. As for f2p mmos please give me an example of truly f2p mmo where you don't spend more or equal to $15/month on its cash shop. These F2p mmos are not free these companies need to make money that's why they made these games. They didn't make them so the freeloaders can play them for free.
Actually, yes, they did. Every player they get adds to the game community, and a thriving community encourages more players to join, who might potentially give them money, and if they don't they still add to the community, encouraging more people to join, and so on.
Subscriptions are only possible if the player believes that the company is doing them a favor by letting them play, when in reality it's entirely the other way around. I'm honestly amazed people are still willing to buy a game and then pay a recurring fee to play something they already purchased.
Numbers mean nothing to you as a player unless they are doing something. People can talk about a MMO being empty when there are few people on but what would those players be doing? Rushing past you? Those players are merely giving you an illusion of activity, how are they actually effecting you and your gameplay?
If a player does not interact with you in any way what are they other than a mobile NPC? So every new player does not add to the gaming community, to do that you need to join in.
Subscriptions mean more new content and better content at that. I am not saying that's always the case, but in the baulk of P2P MMOs it is.
If you need any proof of this, look at the F2P MMOs that players say are their favourite MMO. Time and again they pick MMOs which launched as P2P or B2P. There is a reason for this, partly it is the ethos the game was launched with. A MMO built around microtransactions will invariably distort in depth and solid gameplay. But mostly it is about the funding, P2P gets more and the extra money shows.
You will get those posters who like to show us studies of how F2P is making more money than P2P, but if this was true how come its the P2P MMOs which are seen as better games? At some point in todays market it makes sense for a MMO to go hybrid or F2P. But for the player that's when the game starts to go downhill. Once you bring in a microtransaction ethos, MMOs turn into the gaming equivalent of a shopping mall with a casino at the back.
What the OP is going on about here is players who expect free shopping malls and free casinos. You don't see to much of that in the real world you know.
My point is that the only people who see p2p as better games are p2p players, and I think they are lying to themselves. I played some of the early MMOs and paid subscriptions, but I didn't have any "more" fun in them than I do in some of the better buy to play or free to play products available now. Do p2p players really get better content for their subscription, if the the company turns around and charges them seperately for major expansions? I don't think so.
I'd be willing to pay a subscription, but only if a company was willing to treat it as an actual subscription service, and not an extra way to bilk the gullible out of their money for, in my opinion, nothing.
I really hope the F2P fad goes away soon. It's done nothing so far except give us an army of sh!tty, sub-par games.
Also, while technically GW2 is B2P....it's only technically. In the ways that matter, it's really a F2P game with a much less intrusive and annoying cash shop. Oh, and permitted gold-buying, can't forget that.
Subscriptions mean more new content and better content at that. I am not saying that's always the case, but in the baulk of P2P MMOs it is.
What bulk of sub-only MMOs? There are so few left ..
And which sub-only MMO has better marvel comic based content than Marvel Heroes? There is none .. because there is no marvel based sub-only MMO. And btw, it is designed as f2p from the start.
So more fun, no cost ... i can't even find a sub-only replacement, not to mention a better one.
If you are that interested in a particular IP, then you are going to go with that, not a pricing style.
Not out yet, but City of Titans is a superhero game (not sure its a MMO, but then MH is not either) that will be P2P/B2P in some sort of format. I certainly would not recommend it, as I hardly know anything about it. But it will not be F2P and for me that says extra quality.
If you are that interested in a particular IP, then you are going to go with that, not a pricing style.
Not out yet, but City of Titans is a superhero game (not sure its a MMO, but then MH is not either) that will be P2P/B2P in some sort of format. I certainly would not recommend it, as I hardly know anything about it. But it will not be F2P and for me that says extra quality.
That is certainly true .. i probably will buy MH if it is a SP game.
Nah ... City of Titans has no iron man, captain america and so on ....
If it is F2P or have a demo, i *may* check it out.
But the point is this ... if the IP i am interested in are all F2P, why do i have to care about sub-only MMOs?
Well I don't think you should, if the City of Titans does not grab your imagination stick with MH.
When it comes to quality this sort of example is very hard to evaluate. MH may be F2P, but it has a big IP, to my mind it must have got more funding than your standard F2P release. CoT is a Kickstarter project, so we should be able to see an actual figure to show us how much they spent on it. But some KS projects attract subsequent backers who do not use KS, so its hard to be certain.
There is always DCUO which was P2P originally and once again the funding shows there. But I never really got into that game, CoX was far better in my eyes.
I really liked CoX but it was just difficult to level up after 15th level with my Defender.. I had the same issue with an Alt as well.. I normally do not play during primetime, and it was next to impossible to solo.. I don't know if they ever changed that formula, but a few of us that did play, left for exactly that reason..
Ok I think you need to get off your high horse a little bit here guys. Nobody is asking for free anything.
Free to play games give the option to try the game before you buy the game. It lets you play many hours so you ( the consumer) can see if the company developing the game has a good product. Free to play is also a good option for people who play many mmorpgs. Personally I play 4 casually (all of which I have spent money on as and when I want to) and love the fact I can hop in and out depending on how my mood takes me.
Nobody is asking for everything for free as everyone knows that with free to play, you will end up spending anyways if you enjoy the product. A lot of the time you end up spending more than pay to play so your logic is flawed.
[mod edit]
when you buy a game you have one free month. what you mean is a free trial. my first mmorpg had a free trial. otherwise i would never have started ths genre.
Comments
Who says that is not the right business model since MMOs have to compete with SP games (and other entertainment) for consumer dollars.
May be they should just build solo games, and just expand the MP part a little to be more MMO like, not unlike what D3 has done.
I think WoW type subs with cash shop layers and free trails will become the norm because it makes the most sense. I'd like to see tiered subs.
'Get your money for nothin' get your chicks..erm Mmo for free!'
I don't hate subscriptions, I hate how MMO developers who charge subscriptions use them. I'm having issues getting this in to a form that will make sense to other people, but I'll give it a shot. It's really only when you combine a retail box price with subscriptions that I get angry, and if you have the nerve to have a cash shop on top of that, I'm fighting mad, if you then turn around and charge subscribed players for a boxed expansion I think you are scum not worth spitting on.
Now, if you built your great MMO, and decided to go subscription, and because of that subscription you didn't have a cash shop, and any charge for your box directly translated to an equal or better amount of subscription time, I would think you were an honest company that I wanted to do business with. You're not trying to charge me multiple times for content I'm already subscribed to. I'll keep paying that subscription for complete access to your game, and you will continue adding quality stuff and maintaining a fun experience so I'll want to keep renewing my subscription.
If you sell me your game, and sell me the expansions, and don't charge me a subscription, we're cool too. You're not trying to sell me access to something I already purchased out right from you.
If you finance your game entirely through in game transactions, so long as anything non cosmetic in your game store is reasonably(meaning some, but not ridiculous RNG or grind) obtainable with effort put in to the game, we're also fine. I'll give you the money I think my experience was worth to me, and you'll keep adding quality stuff and maintaining a fun experience so I want to keep giving you money.
But if you want me to pay a retail box price to recoop your development costs in one go and then a subscription starting shortly after that, while attempting to charge me in a cash shop for cash shop exclusives, and expecting me to pay you additional money every time you add major content, you can go jump off a cliff.
Our F2P players are living the rock and roll dream, who would have believed it?
also Guild Wars Jeff Strain was an outspoken critic of sub fees
2007 GDC speech
http://www.guildwars.com/events/tradeshows/gc2007/gcspeech.php
Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs.
It's not true – you know it, and they know it.
Gamers may buy the argument that your MMO requires a subscription fee, if you can tell them what they are getting for their money. This is the legacy of games like Guild Wars, Maple Story, and Silkroad Online, all of which introduced new business models into the MMO genre and were quite successful.
The subscription model is still perfectly viable, but the pain threshold is very low now. It's no secret that gamers don't want to pay a subscription fee. If you can convince them that your game offers enough value to justify it, more power to you! But be prepared to defend your decision, often and loudly, and back it up over the lifetime of your game.
EQ2 fan sites
Netflix costs $8 a month .. cheaper than MMO.
Example .. Marvel Heroes. I finished the story content with TWO characters for 60 hours of fun without paying a dime. They are free if you don't pay .. and I am enjoying STO for free too.
And yes, they offer these games free to free loaders ... otherwise, how do you explain i am having tens of hours of free fun?
Actually, yes, they did. Every player they get adds to the game community, and a thriving community encourages more players to join, who might potentially give them money, and if they don't they still add to the community, encouraging more people to join, and so on.
Subscriptions are only possible if the player believes that the company is doing them a favor by letting them play, when in reality it's entirely the other way around. I'm honestly amazed people are still willing to buy a game and then pay a recurring fee to play something they already purchased.
Numbers mean nothing to you as a player unless they are doing something. People can talk about a MMO being empty when there are few people on but what would those players be doing? Rushing past you? Those players are merely giving you an illusion of activity, how are they actually effecting you and your gameplay?
If a player does not interact with you in any way what are they other than a mobile NPC? So every new player does not add to the gaming community, to do that you need to join in.
Subscriptions mean more new content and better content at that. I am not saying that's always the case, but in the baulk of P2P MMOs it is.
If you need any proof of this, look at the F2P MMOs that players say are their favourite MMO. Time and again they pick MMOs which launched as P2P or B2P. There is a reason for this, partly it is the ethos the game was launched with. A MMO built around microtransactions will invariably distort in depth and solid gameplay. But mostly it is about the funding, P2P gets more and the extra money shows.
You will get those posters who like to show us studies of how F2P is making more money than P2P, but if this was true how come its the P2P MMOs which are seen as better games? At some point in todays market it makes sense for a MMO to go hybrid or F2P. But for the player that's when the game starts to go downhill. Once you bring in a microtransaction ethos, MMOs turn into the gaming equivalent of a shopping mall with a casino at the back.
What the OP is going on about here is players who expect free shopping malls and free casinos. You don't see to much of that in the real world you know.
My point is that the only people who see p2p as better games are p2p players, and I think they are lying to themselves. I played some of the early MMOs and paid subscriptions, but I didn't have any "more" fun in them than I do in some of the better buy to play or free to play products available now. Do p2p players really get better content for their subscription, if the the company turns around and charges them seperately for major expansions? I don't think so.
I'd be willing to pay a subscription, but only if a company was willing to treat it as an actual subscription service, and not an extra way to bilk the gullible out of their money for, in my opinion, nothing.
I really hope the F2P fad goes away soon. It's done nothing so far except give us an army of sh!tty, sub-par games.
Also, while technically GW2 is B2P....it's only technically. In the ways that matter, it's really a F2P game with a much less intrusive and annoying cash shop. Oh, and permitted gold-buying, can't forget that.
What bulk of sub-only MMOs? There are so few left ..
And which sub-only MMO has better marvel comic based content than Marvel Heroes? There is none .. because there is no marvel based sub-only MMO. And btw, it is designed as f2p from the start.
So more fun, no cost ... i can't even find a sub-only replacement, not to mention a better one.
If you are that interested in a particular IP, then you are going to go with that, not a pricing style.
Not out yet, but City of Titans is a superhero game (not sure its a MMO, but then MH is not either) that will be P2P/B2P in some sort of format. I certainly would not recommend it, as I hardly know anything about it. But it will not be F2P and for me that says extra quality.
That is certainly true .. i probably will buy MH if it is a SP game.
Nah ... City of Titans has no iron man, captain america and so on ....
If it is F2P or have a demo, i *may* check it out.
But the point is this ... if the IP i am interested in are all F2P, why do i have to care about sub-only MMOs?
Well I don't think you should, if the City of Titans does not grab your imagination stick with MH.
When it comes to quality this sort of example is very hard to evaluate. MH may be F2P, but it has a big IP, to my mind it must have got more funding than your standard F2P release. CoT is a Kickstarter project, so we should be able to see an actual figure to show us how much they spent on it. But some KS projects attract subsequent backers who do not use KS, so its hard to be certain.
There is always DCUO which was P2P originally and once again the funding shows there. But I never really got into that game, CoX was far better in my eyes.
when you buy a game you have one free month. what you mean is a free trial. my first mmorpg had a free trial. otherwise i would never have started ths genre.