after wading through all the verbiage, and i get that you don't like P2P and are heavily into F2P, but the fact remains, P2P games do tend to be better quality etc, than F2P games, if they aren't then they don't stay P2P for very long, if this was not the case then nobody would play P2P games and all games would be increasingly F2P, which they obviously, are not. The other factor which you are seemingly ignoring, is that a lot of the F2P games made are not meant to have any real longevity, they have an extremely high turnover in player numbers, and the only real 'content' added to them is usually in the form of cash shop purchases rather than 'real' content which is something that P2P games do tend to add on a regular basis, after all they don't need to try and get you to spend more, something that a F2P game has to constantly try to get you to do, so P2P games can concentrate on adding more content to keep players playing, which is also one of the reasons why successful P2P games tend to be far superior to even their nearest F2P contenders.
As for the argument that F2P games aren't P2W, most of them are, its rare that their not, and is entirely a corollary of the cash shop mentality that infests F2P games. But feel free to point out which F2P games are not P2W
The future though, of MMO's might well be a hybrid system where a subscription unlocks the 'main game' and F2P is more of a 'trial' with lots of restrictions, that can be unlocked for a fee, SW;TOR is pretty much using this system already, and it works for them. But in order to compete at end game in PVP or to Participate in the OPs etc, you have to either continually buy weekly unlocks, for a $$ fee, or you subscribe, and someone determined to keep as a F2P player and enjoy end game content, unless its just 1 week a month, is likely to spend a lot more than a subscriber for the priviledge
P2P does represent better VFM imo, because you pay up front, a relatively small fee, for unlimited game play. The developers can count on a revenue stream without resorting to continually create $$ items to tempt players, and can concentrate on the important things, like increasing a games content base, from adventures/dungeons/storylines etc without having to worry about how to make players buy something every week.
Its also a level playing field for any game with PVP, as any F2P game with a cash shop inevitably has P2W items, just look at Planetside 2, the cash shop there sells things that give a massive advantage in combat, from aircraft weapons, to tank turret upgrades, to submachine guns and pistols etc. that are significantly better than the stock weapons players are issued with. Thats not to say that Planetside 2 is not a fun game, its a huge amount of fun, but if you really want to be successful, you have to buy those weapons.
Thats just touching a few reasons why i think P2P games are superior, thats not to say that there aren't P2P games out there that i don't like, there are, but the games out there that i do like, are, or tend to have a P2P option. And based on their current/past performance, their not in any danger of failing anytime soon
In a nut shell the main points I dislike about F2P models :-
1) IF a item is in the game I want to have the chance to get the item
2) If I find a chest I want the chance to open it
3) If there is and adventure area I want the ability to explore it
4) IF there is a class/race I want the ability to play it
5) I want the right to have access to any and all features the game offers
With a Subscription I get these for the flat agreed price. With a F2P model I will be milked out of a fortune because basically I would be paying not only for my game time but for all those freeloaders out there who want the game for free. Basically if you want the whole game you will be paying 100s if not 1000 times more for all the content than you would if your paid by subscription.
This gets even worse when your purchases are character based not account based ....
after wading through all the verbiage, and i get that you don't like P2P and are heavily into F2P, but the fact remains, P2P games do tend to be better quality etc, than F2P games, if they aren't then they don't stay P2P for very long, if this was not the case then nobody would play P2P games and all games would be increasingly F2P, which they obviously, are not.
I find assertions of P2P's overall superior quality unconvincing. Most people go on to state that if said P2P switches to F2P it shows it didn't have the necessary quality to stay P2P, otherwise people would've stayed and paid, which they're obviously not.
That's like that No True Scotsman reasoning I mentioned earlier. Just replace "Scotsman" with "quality MMO" and the same logic is there. But notice how the "quality factor" as presented above doesn't argue for other explanations. It also downplays the increasing competitive-ness of the MMO market by ignoring this as a possible factor - something no mmo-investor or publisher would be wise to do.
Ex: Someone loses a job. Or maybe more than a few someones finally just grow bored of the P2P mmo after 1-2 years even though the game's quality hasn't dropped. Maybe a newly launched P2P fits their desires even better than their current one even if they are still happy with the current one. Or maybe new expenses cut into a subbers budget and suddenly it's either Netflix or the mmo but not both. That subbers wife and kids regularly watch Netflix shows with him but he's the only one in the family playing an mmo. Which one do you think he's most likely to cut from his monthly budget? (Hint: the odds aren't looking good it'll be the P2P that stays).
Or maybe a lot of subscribers decide to only play one P2P at a time. After all...$360-$560 a year isn't pocket change for their P2P entertainment although they'll trumpet to everyone that $180 sure is. Besides, the fact $180 is mere pocket change is proof P2P-lovers are not one of Them...you know...a 'Whale' *cough*cough*
Hey, maybe one of these mmorpg.com P2P > F2P guys will volunteer to buy me a year's worth of Wildstar access to prove how affordable P2P is.
The other factor which you are seemingly ignoring, is that a lot of the F2P games made are not meant to have any real longevity, they have an extremely high turnover in player numbers,
Subscription MMOs have high turnover too. And P2P-preferring gamers can rightfully point out it's super-easy to unsubscribe. And they do. It's super-easy to do. Hassle-free unsubbing is yours with a single click. Just one click and boom...no more monthly auto-draft of the bank account. Lotsa people on mmorpg announce all the time they've quit subbing to this or that mmo. Which Ramakin over at Gamasutra confirms. He has an entire blog there (and a published white-paper on the topic) explaining why subscription-churn is burning a not-insubstantial percentage of MMO publishers. Subscribers ignore this factor too. So one can't lay that "ignoring that factor" primarily on people with F2P/B2P preferences. BTW - I think increasing product-competition along with overall employment factors are driving a lot of the high churn and burn rate of both F2P and subscription-only MMOs. If developed nations were not seeing stagnating wages along with dismal employment figures maybe both kinds would exhibit less churn.
As for the argument that F2P games aren't P2W, most of them are, its rare that their not, and is entirely a corollary of the cash shop mentality that infests F2P games. But feel free to point out which F2P games are not P2W
Well here's one: I don't consider Neverwinter's PvP to be P2W. And I've played Neverwinter's PvP. And won about as often as I lost. But never once have I ever bought any advantage from the cash shop. From what I can see there are no weapons, buffs, potions or anything else that I can buy from the Neverwinter cash shop and then pop into PvP and gain a game-breaking can-of-whoop-ass advantage over my opponents. Rift doesn't either from what I hear. And...Although I concede it's not solely F2P (though it has a cash shop too) TSW's PvP has zero options for buying game-breaking PvP advantages and I play TSW's PvP several nights per week with my BF. My guess is it's probably like that with GW2's PvP as well though I can't say since I've never played any of that game's PvP. I also hear World of Tanks - though it's F2P only like Neverwinter - is not P2W either. I'm sure there are other F2P MMOs that can give good PvP experiences without having game-breaking cashshop advantages for sale. I think game-breaking PvP advantages are due to developer and publisher inexperience still in the F2P market. It doesn't *have* to defacto be that way and I'm sure that in time it will die out among most all (if not actually all) western-dev'd MMOs and probably a good number of Asian ones as well.
The future though, of MMO's might well be a hybrid system where a subscription unlocks the 'main game' and F2P is more of a 'trial' with lots of restrictions, that can be unlocked for a fee, SW;TOR is pretty much using this system already, and it works for them. But in order to compete at end game in PVP or to Participate in the OPs etc, you have to either continually buy weekly unlocks, for a $$ fee, or you subscribe, and someone determined to keep as a F2P player and enjoy end game content, unless its just 1 week a month, is likely to spend a lot more than a subscriber for the priviledge
The kind of hybrid model you describe is not what GW2 or TSW do and I'm very glad for it. That very attitude by a publisher of "let's create a punishing playing environment for our cash-shop supporters" is why I did not DL and play SWTOR or Turbine's D&D or LotrO games (though I hear Turbine no longer punishes their cash-shop-preferring supporters this way though EA, sadly, still does).
Now do those publishers have the right to price-discriminate among their playerbase in the way you describe? Yep. Sure do. And I won't be playing and paying for their games for that very reason. They've made it clear they'll take my money but only while holding their nose. And I'm sure they'll push some cash shop-supporters of their games into becoming yet more of their brainless-overpaying-sheeple...oops...I mean subscribers (but hey..it's none of my concern when a fool and his money are soon parted).
***to the board, not Phry***
The above is the same condescending and elitist tone of "cheapskate, freeloading F2P-players" posts exuding from many mmorpg.com posters - like the ones in this very thread. Most of whom need to read Bromancer7's post in detail.
P2P does represent better VFM imo, because you pay up front, a relatively small fee, for unlimited game play. The developers can count on a revenue stream without resorting to continually create $$ items to tempt players, and can concentrate on the important things, like increasing a games content base, from adventures/dungeons/storylines etc without having to worry about how to make players buy something every week.
If you find $15 a month the higher value by all means P2P is the way to go.
Bromancer7 explained why P2P gamers don't get "important" stuff from dev's at a faster rate, better quality, etc than F2P/B2P games. F2P devs are increasing a game's content, new storylines, missions, dungeons, in-game drops or craftable gear, etc too. Really...Who wants to buy from a cash shop when the quality of the ongoing content of a game sucks whether that game is F2P or P2P? No game developer can afford to be cavalier with their content updates (unless your Blizzard I suppose...) and expect to survive in the current MMO marketplace. And if the stuff in the cash shop is cosmetic only then your argument is moot since by definition the items for sale will not be something that's going to have an impact on how the game designers design new content nor the players play the game. Go play Path of Exile which is a cosmetics-only cash-shop game to see that F2P only business model doesn't mean it's a slam-dunk P2P is the superior product category these days.
Its also a level playing field for any game with PVP, as any F2P game with a cash shop inevitably has P2W items, just look at Planetside 2, the cash shop there sells things that give a massive advantage in combat, from aircraft weapons, to tank turret upgrades, to submachine guns and pistols etc. that are significantly better than the stock weapons players are issued with. Thats not to say that Planetside 2 is not a fun game, its a huge amount of fun, but if you really want to be successful, you have to buy those weapons.
Having never played Planetside2 I can't say. World of Tanks doesn't seem to have a playerbase that finds the game unfair even though I'm told they sell tanks in their cash shop. If I understand it correctly "cash-shop only" tanks aren't permitted to face off against non-cash shop tanks in a deliberate effort by the publisher to keep the game level to both payers and non-payers.
Thats just touching a few reasons why i think P2P games are superior, thats not to say that there aren't P2P games out there that i don't like, there are, but the games out there that i do like, are, or tend to have a P2P option. And based on their current/past performance, their not in any danger of failing anytime soon
The money made by a publisher should be invisible to the playing process. Supporting a game via cash shop or via subscription should actually be a wash in-game in any MMO. Advantages due to one payment system over another doesn't need to occur if the publisher implements things right. I think there are hybrid mmos out there right now that achieve exactly this.
I don't see any reason the MMO market has to be either/or. There's room for all of us.
p.s..can someone please tell me in a PM how the above poster put those cute smilies in his post? I can't seem to find them.
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Originally posted by fivoroth Soooo, I am only supposed to play 1 game? Is that what you guys are saying? You are talking as $15 is nothing but that's only one game. I have so many games which I never get around to playing, and sometimes want to play ANOTHER game? I know it's unthinkable to think of playing another game other than the MMO you are married to.Your comparison to TV is a bit flawed. It's like paying $15 for one channel. Cause for those $15 I can get to play only 1 game. My phone bill is £38 bucks and that includes a phone which would probably cost me £650 if I went out to buy it.Anyways I can buy so many other games which are dirt cheap and offer quite a lot of entertainment and then I can keep playing them forever.$60 upfront and $15 after that is quite a lot. That's $75 for 2 months. MMOs have unnecessary time sinks which make them BORING because they want you to play as long as possible. If they could design something to take 2 hours, they are much better off designing so you do the same content in 10-20 hours.
Then do a Lifetime Sub to a mmo you like.
I am subbed to 2 games, have 2 LTS, other games i'll check in on and maybe sub a bit
The LTS means you don't have to worry about monthly costs anymore, the subs you do pay can be made cheaper by going 3/6 months or better yearly.
str8 to OP, yes i agree absolutely and thats the reason i believe subscription model is a failed model cause they bring all this stress to do things before your sub ends.. also its not viable if you have a family and responsibilities or you at middle ages without job (in Greece i live half young people are unemployment ..) so 15 per month for a single game is a pain...
i prefer the b2p or the f2p model well instead of a subscription you can get daily or weekly or even monthly boosters depending your free time and when you dont have enough free time you can just log in to do some daily or just for fun, with the restriction of NO being able to visit the game...
i really dunno how people still accept subscription which if it ends doesnt allow you to play your game, although you have paid before, its stupid ...
the argument about quality and AAA standards becomes invalid when you try to comparison GW2 and ArcheAge with ESO and Wildstar ..
If you have one MMO that you can play day after day, week after week a subscription is great. Pay $15 a month and you get everything.
If you want to hop between MMO's and there are weeks when you don't even bother to login you don't get much value for that subscription and its better with f2p/b2p.
I prefer subscription based MMOs that deliver an experience worthy of $15 a month. Sadly, there aren't many games that can deliver that kind of experience for more than a few months.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Reading the comments, people keep saying it is a small amount.. it isn't $180 over 12 months and what if I play other MMOs? What if I pay for stuff like Netflix? I have house bills, I have tax, I have my mobile, my car and whatever else pops up.
What is the first to go? Subscription based MMOs.
Then don't play them, but geez, stop whining about it. I make a lot more than $180 a day. It's honestly not a large expense. If it's not something that you want to pay, don't pay it.
One of the main reasons subscription MMOs are losing popularity is the rise of gamers who play more than one MMO at a time. I have two MMOs that I play regularly and 3 others that I dabble in. This would not be possible if they each required a subscription. There is no single MMO that would make me want to give up all the others and is unlikely there ever will be another one size fits all MMO that is actually good.
Many MMO's aren't sub based, so don't play the ones that are.
Like your car. Do you have the absolute cheapest car that does the job for you? The cheapest house that performs the minimum "house like" functions you require?
If we are talking none essentials, do you always go on the cheapest holiday there is? Do you never go out to the cinema or restaurant, and if you do do you always pick the cheapest?
No?
Well that's value decisions for you then. That is you being grown up and making a decision on what to spend your money on.
Some games are free, and some cost cash. So what?
Spending money is about value choices. You don't want to or can't afford something? Others can, do, and prefer it.
For instance, I have never found a a game that began life as a none sub that I liked. GW2 came closest, but I still don't really like it. So guess what. I make the value choice to pay subs for games I prefer.
You have those exact same opportunities. Many games ask for no sub, so go and knock yourself out on those. Woopee we all win.
Except you go out of your way to criticize the products others choose to buy and prefer.
And "Hate" such a strong word for such a completely innocuous topic. Where do you go in life if you "hate" subscription games? Jeepers. Wouldn't want to be around when something real happen near you. I guess no words could express whatever emotion you'd feel about them. Maybe you'd have to invent your own
Summary: You don't actuallty NEED a game? So don't buy it. Others prefer them, so why not live and let live?
Sure $15 a month isn't expensive until you look at it being $180 per year and then I see that as ALOT to spend on one game.
I at most play for 80 hours spread out throughout a year, that is around 6/7 hours a month. Am I really going to have to spend $180 to be able to play when I want? I have so many other games to play, so much else to do in my life, one MMO isn't all I play.
So if I have to pay a sub... I just wont bother.
The market agrees with you even if some people here don't. It doesn't matter why players don't want to pay subs ( game hoping I'm sure is a big one ) f2p isn't something that's getting smaller or less popular.
If you look at the future games being made this is really the dumbest thing people argue about. Nothing really seems to indicate either payment model is going to "die" both types are still being made. The past only shows that mmos that can't hold on to people go free to play. Subs are still viable for some games and f2p is going to be made. This is really like arguing what your favorite type of icecream is.
Most people agree with this. The reason for the hostility is that the OP makes it sound like somehow devs have to cater to his preference. The reality is that there is more than enough games out there that are f2p. If a game chooses to stick with subs, it is every gamers choice to pay for the sub or not.
And honestly, if $180 a year us going to break you than maybe you should stay away from any sub game...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
One of the benefits of age is you learn not to waste so much time and energy sweating the small stuff. I couldn't even list or cost my incidental expenses let alone spend copious amounts of time / energy debating their value or morality/ideology.
Seems like you should look at facebook games or somewhere else to get your gaming fix. 6-7 hours a month in any mmo you're not getting much out of it. The genre does not support that casual of play, atleast I wouldn't play an mmo that did.
What are you talking about? There are tons of F2P MMOs that need zero commitment, and can be enjoyed piecemeal, 15 min at a time.
So, let's say I play some f2p game. I drop $20 during a month for whatever items I want in the game. I play a total of 4 hours that month. Then, you have the guy next to me that plays 30 hours or more in a month. Spends $0 during that month (or any month for that matter). Who is paying for that second person to play the game. Sorry, but I do not feel I have an obligation to pay for someone else's entertainment time. I would rather pay $15 per month and get everything in the game and play the hours I wish to play rather then play limited hours and pay for someone else to play for free.
My problem with subscriptions is that it charges you the same rate as everyone else no matter how much you play. So if someone plays 24/7, they're paying exactly the same as someone who only manages to get 4 hours a week in.
I think forced subscriptions have to go and they need to be replaced by optional ones + the F2P model.
While I understand where you are coming from, I do not agree with you. Specifically what I colored red. I don't think anyone, whether it is a casual or a hardcore player, should get any kind of cost reduction on a subscription for a video game. If you find that you do not get the most out of your money for the subscription you've paid for because you don't have enough time to play, then you really probably shouldn't play any MMO that requires a subscription. And that's on you if you want to- it's your perogative. I just don't think, "I'm grown, I'm busy, I can't be held to a subscription if I don't play that much 'cos it's too expensive" is really a good enough reason for anybody to receive any kind of price cut, discount, or anything else that is a monetary setback to the product you are purchasing.
I, personally, prefer Subscriptions. I, personally, would rather be part of a community that cares enough to pay to be there than to be stuck in a F2P hell where people can make multiple accounts to troll the community, smaller chances to catc hhacks/exploits, and anything else that comes along with F2P that I have personally seen and not wanting anything to do with.
What I don't understand is why people seem to think it is okay to buy a game and then turn around and pay a fee just to actually play it. Exactly what did you buy? Nothing. You paid a fee to allow you to pay a fee to play a game for a limited period of time. And before you pipe in with "the game comes with 30 days free game time"... did the game cost you $15? No. If the game was $60, you should be able to play it for 4 months if game time alone was what you were buying.
THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH SUBSCRIPTIONS!
It has nothing to do with how often you play, it has everything to do with the fact that you paid for a game that you don't actually own. Liken it to the old arcades... you paid a quarter to play Asteroids until you used up all your lives. That could be 10 seconds or 10 hours. You didn't buy the game first then start plunking quarters into it. If you're going to require quarters to play the game, the game should be free. If the game is not free, you can't charge people money to play it.
All this nonsense. If a subscription based game failed, it was the game that failed, not the payment model. @OP. If someone releases, in your opinion, the most epic MMORPG ever made, Completely destroys WoW, and re hooks you into it as if it were your 1st days back in EQ (or what ever game made you fall in love with the genre), you'd pay. We'd all pay......well, most of us probably would.
The reason why the Sub model is in decline is because there aren't any games worthy of it.
So, let's say I play some f2p game. I drop $20 during a month for whatever items I want in the game. I play a total of 4 hours that month. Then, you have the guy next to me that plays 30 hours or more in a month. Spends $0 during that month (or any month for that matter). Who is paying for that second person to play the game. Sorry, but I do not feel I have an obligation to pay for someone else's entertainment time. I would rather pay $15 per month and get everything in the game and play the hours I wish to play rather then play limited hours and pay for someone else to play for free.
paying is optional in F2P. You don't have to pay for the other guy's free play if you don't want to.
That is the whole point of "free" in f2p, you know.
Originally posted by free2play Your internet connection likely starts at $45 a month but people don't feel a driven need to be online 20 hrs a day to justify it.
In my country, you can get optical fiber Internet for 15 per month...
I want to move to your Country!
PS: I could not help but read your, "In my Country..." with a Yakov Smirnoff accent
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
Off topic, but most people don't know that the major telecomm companies in the USA were given over $400 million of tax credits to build a high speed fiber-optic network. Of course, they never did, because fuck taxpayers.
I pay $85 a month for my Cell. I usually text, and browse the internet, but rarely talk. That $85 doesn't change unless I go over on data or buy something.
Your satelite tv subscription is $65+ typically. You don't watch TV 24/7 and there is really no guarantee you'll watch it daily. That fee doesn't change.
Not the best examples, but your health and auto insurance are paid monthly, regardless of whether or not you need to use it (yes, I know...it is required, but still the same idea)
$15 for a game is insignificant compared to the above. What, $15 is like 3 packs of cigarettes for a smoker? The average smoke spends more than that in a month....Just saying
It is just a matter of what you are willing to pay for.
Raquelis in various games Played: Everything Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6 Wants: The World Anticipating:Everquest NextCrowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Cost is irrelevant. To me it's a matter of justification. I paid $50, $60 or so for a game, I expect to be able to play the game! But they want me to pay extra, every month, to access the game I already paid for? Really? The whole sub model has been proven unnecessary by GW2. By the box, play forever, no subs. How do they make money? By selling optional non-P2W fluff in the cash shop, stuff you can do perfectly fine without. Does it work? They're making tons of money, so it works. Plus they've been updating content every two weeks and are now about to release in China.
Justification. You can no longer justify making me pay a sub fee, regardless of the amount, to access a game I paid for off the shelf to play.
I pay $85 a month for my Cell. I usually text, and browse the internet, but rarely talk. That $85 doesn't change unless I go over on data or buy something.
Your satelite tv subscription is $65+ typically. You don't watch TV 24/7 and there is really no guarantee you'll watch it daily. That fee doesn't change.
Not the best examples, but your health and auto insurance are paid monthly, regardless of whether or not you need to use it (yes, I know...it is required, but still the same idea)
$15 for a game is insignificant compared to the above. What, $15 is like 3 packs of cigarettes for a smoker? The average smoke spends more than that in a month....Just saying
It is just a matter of what you are willing to pay for.
And the answer to that depends on the competition.
I pay like $45 for high speed internet (i get like unlimited 30Mbps) and if there is another company offering the same thing for less, i will go for that. I can afford $45, but there is no reason to pay even a cent more than i need to.
The same goes for MMO. I can afford $15 but why would i pay even a cent when i can get the same or more fun for free? It would be better use for that $15 to buy 3 coffees or a IMAX movie ticket.
Exactly, this is why subscriptions don't work and why I support Buy to Play with DLC.
Downloaded Content can make them money without having to resort to Pay to Win. Make us quest and raid for our gear and cosmetics, our mounts and our pets, our special spells etc.
Make us do hard challenging class and racial quests to attain our stuff. Force us to play not pay.
Why do people pay for DLC on console games, but expect free to play on the pc? Everyone knows you pay for console games, and it isn't subscription fees!!
Sure, you get to play demos, but you don't get the entire game for free!!
That being said, I think buy to play would solve all of the issues of power leveling, and feeling forced into getting the most out of your money so you can cancel your subscription and quit in time for the "next big thing's" release.
Every new mmo that releases people have to quit their old subscriptions in order to play it! Companies shouldn't expect rotational turn over of the subscription roulette (aka wow's 1-3 month wonders who quit every expansion), and they should encourage loyalty and longevity, by allowing us to login and play when our subscription is turned off, but making us lose our beneficial "perks".
This is only done correctly by a few games, like Rift and Tera, and Lord of the Rings Online which allows you to grind for turbine points by actually playing the game.
No one should ever feel forced and rushed in a game, they should feel relaxed and happy!
Allow people to do what they have time for. Allow soloists to get fabled high quality equipment, but make it hard and challenging quest lines, with many expected deaths. Make it take a high amount of effort!! Why should raiders have the best gear? Make raiding in a way easier, because many people are helping you, and soloists would have to do every single step themselves!
Everyone thinks games need to be easy, because no one has time, why not just have games that are friendly to casuals without time, by taking sub fees away and instead creating very hard challenging content? Allow people who need that extra help on the content to ask for other players for help, or buy a downloaded mercenary or something to help them (only they would have to actually earn it before it works!) .
WoW is the prime guilty party here. They have a blizzard marketplace shop for RMT, while being a subscription game!! You can't earn any of those items in game, they are all exclusives.
Any subscription game released will probably sooner or later sell extra RMT Exclusives on the side, so what is the subscription really for? Why not just release DLC that allows you to earn these items in-game, instead of rewarding rich people?
Or, the rediculously low drop rates on mounts in WoW, that you can't even earn after killing a raid boss 100 or 300 times, because its a 0.25% drop rate for that mount. What's the point?
There's simply no reason to have a subscription, just give us faster content updates that we can pay for. Back when Sony tried the $5 adventure pack mini expansion idea, I actually bought all 3 and thought it was a good idea. It's way better than paying a subscription monthly!!!
Why can't we get updates? Simply because games like WoW are lazy. Almost never updates, and millions are paying subscription fees monthly!! We haven't had an update for the past half a year or more. You get maybe 3 content updates or less every 2 years with WoW. Subscriptions simply have no point and no value. Free games like Rift give constant world events and reasons to login, WoW hasn't added a single new item to their World Events for the past 3 or so years.
They rely on pointless grinding and lockouts to entice you to keep coming back, as well as low loot drop rates. While other free games actually add fun and exciting content!
Unfortunately, its just hard to show people sometimes the nature of mmos and why subscriptions just don't work...
Sony used to be subscription with their games, they haven't stopped updating content and adding new things because they went free, they remain working hard just as always!! Lord of the Rings Online is making 5 times more money being free than they ever were as a sub game!!
It is time to let old archaic business models die, and accept that a la carte purchases and downloaded extra content is the best way to go now. So, we can all find time to play our games and enjoy them, regardless of if we have more time or more money.
Comments
after wading through all the verbiage, and i get that you don't like P2P and are heavily into F2P, but the fact remains, P2P games do tend to be better quality etc, than F2P games, if they aren't then they don't stay P2P for very long, if this was not the case then nobody would play P2P games and all games would be increasingly F2P, which they obviously, are not. The other factor which you are seemingly ignoring, is that a lot of the F2P games made are not meant to have any real longevity, they have an extremely high turnover in player numbers, and the only real 'content' added to them is usually in the form of cash shop purchases rather than 'real' content which is something that P2P games do tend to add on a regular basis, after all they don't need to try and get you to spend more, something that a F2P game has to constantly try to get you to do, so P2P games can concentrate on adding more content to keep players playing, which is also one of the reasons why successful P2P games tend to be far superior to even their nearest F2P contenders.
As for the argument that F2P games aren't P2W, most of them are, its rare that their not, and is entirely a corollary of the cash shop mentality that infests F2P games. But feel free to point out which F2P games are not P2W
The future though, of MMO's might well be a hybrid system where a subscription unlocks the 'main game' and F2P is more of a 'trial' with lots of restrictions, that can be unlocked for a fee, SW;TOR is pretty much using this system already, and it works for them. But in order to compete at end game in PVP or to Participate in the OPs etc, you have to either continually buy weekly unlocks, for a $$ fee, or you subscribe, and someone determined to keep as a F2P player and enjoy end game content, unless its just 1 week a month, is likely to spend a lot more than a subscriber for the priviledge
P2P does represent better VFM imo, because you pay up front, a relatively small fee, for unlimited game play. The developers can count on a revenue stream without resorting to continually create $$ items to tempt players, and can concentrate on the important things, like increasing a games content base, from adventures/dungeons/storylines etc without having to worry about how to make players buy something every week.
Its also a level playing field for any game with PVP, as any F2P game with a cash shop inevitably has P2W items, just look at Planetside 2, the cash shop there sells things that give a massive advantage in combat, from aircraft weapons, to tank turret upgrades, to submachine guns and pistols etc. that are significantly better than the stock weapons players are issued with. Thats not to say that Planetside 2 is not a fun game, its a huge amount of fun, but if you really want to be successful, you have to buy those weapons.
Thats just touching a few reasons why i think P2P games are superior, thats not to say that there aren't P2P games out there that i don't like, there are, but the games out there that i do like, are, or tend to have a P2P option. And based on their current/past performance, their not in any danger of failing anytime soon
In a nut shell the main points I dislike about F2P models :-
1) IF a item is in the game I want to have the chance to get the item
2) If I find a chest I want the chance to open it
3) If there is and adventure area I want the ability to explore it
4) IF there is a class/race I want the ability to play it
5) I want the right to have access to any and all features the game offers
With a Subscription I get these for the flat agreed price. With a F2P model I will be milked out of a fortune because basically I would be paying not only for my game time but for all those freeloaders out there who want the game for free. Basically if you want the whole game you will be paying 100s if not 1000 times more for all the content than you would if your paid by subscription.
This gets even worse when your purchases are character based not account based ....
Playing Now: The Secret World, Guild Wars 2, Neverwinter
Playing soon: Landmark beta, Swordman beta
Then do a Lifetime Sub to a mmo you like.
I am subbed to 2 games, have 2 LTS, other games i'll check in on and maybe sub a bit
The LTS means you don't have to worry about monthly costs anymore, the subs you do pay can be made cheaper by going 3/6 months or better yearly.
str8 to OP, yes i agree absolutely and thats the reason i believe subscription model is a failed model cause they bring all this stress to do things before your sub ends.. also its not viable if you have a family and responsibilities or you at middle ages without job (in Greece i live half young people are unemployment ..) so 15 per month for a single game is a pain...
i prefer the b2p or the f2p model well instead of a subscription you can get daily or weekly or even monthly boosters depending your free time and when you dont have enough free time you can just log in to do some daily or just for fun, with the restriction of NO being able to visit the game...
i really dunno how people still accept subscription which if it ends doesnt allow you to play your game, although you have paid before, its stupid ...
the argument about quality and AAA standards becomes invalid when you try to comparison GW2 and ArcheAge with ESO and Wildstar ..
thats my bad english text, thanx for reading : )
If you have one MMO that you can play day after day, week after week a subscription is great. Pay $15 a month and you get everything.
If you want to hop between MMO's and there are weeks when you don't even bother to login you don't get much value for that subscription and its better with f2p/b2p.
I prefer subscription based MMOs that deliver an experience worthy of $15 a month. Sadly, there aren't many games that can deliver that kind of experience for more than a few months.
Then don't play them, but geez, stop whining about it. I make a lot more than $180 a day. It's honestly not a large expense. If it's not something that you want to pay, don't pay it.
Played: UO, EQ, WoW, DDO, SWG, AO, CoH, EvE, TR, AoC, GW, GA, Aion, Allods, lots more
Relatively Recently (Re)Played: HL2 (all), Halo (PC, all), Batman:AA; AC, ME, BS, DA, FO3, DS, Doom (all), LFD1&2, KOTOR, Portal 1&2, Blink, Elder Scrolls (all), lots more
Now Playing: None
Hope: None
@OP Don't play them then.
Many MMO's aren't sub based, so don't play the ones that are.
Like your car. Do you have the absolute cheapest car that does the job for you? The cheapest house that performs the minimum "house like" functions you require?
If we are talking none essentials, do you always go on the cheapest holiday there is? Do you never go out to the cinema or restaurant, and if you do do you always pick the cheapest?
No?
Well that's value decisions for you then. That is you being grown up and making a decision on what to spend your money on.
Some games are free, and some cost cash. So what?
Spending money is about value choices. You don't want to or can't afford something? Others can, do, and prefer it.
For instance, I have never found a a game that began life as a none sub that I liked. GW2 came closest, but I still don't really like it. So guess what. I make the value choice to pay subs for games I prefer.
You have those exact same opportunities. Many games ask for no sub, so go and knock yourself out on those. Woopee we all win.
Except you go out of your way to criticize the products others choose to buy and prefer.
And "Hate" such a strong word for such a completely innocuous topic. Where do you go in life if you "hate" subscription games? Jeepers. Wouldn't want to be around when something real happen near you. I guess no words could express whatever emotion you'd feel about them. Maybe you'd have to invent your own
Summary: You don't actuallty NEED a game? So don't buy it. Others prefer them, so why not live and let live?
Grow a pair and stop whining like a spoilt child
Well put, and of course, 100% correct.
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
Most people agree with this. The reason for the hostility is that the OP makes it sound like somehow devs have to cater to his preference. The reality is that there is more than enough games out there that are f2p. If a game chooses to stick with subs, it is every gamers choice to pay for the sub or not.
And honestly, if $180 a year us going to break you than maybe you should stay away from any sub game...
A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true...
What are you talking about? There are tons of F2P MMOs that need zero commitment, and can be enjoyed piecemeal, 15 min at a time.
So, let's say I play some f2p game. I drop $20 during a month for whatever items I want in the game. I play a total of 4 hours that month. Then, you have the guy next to me that plays 30 hours or more in a month. Spends $0 during that month (or any month for that matter). Who is paying for that second person to play the game. Sorry, but I do not feel I have an obligation to pay for someone else's entertainment time. I would rather pay $15 per month and get everything in the game and play the hours I wish to play rather then play limited hours and pay for someone else to play for free.
Let's party like it is 1863!
What I don't understand is why people seem to think it is okay to buy a game and then turn around and pay a fee just to actually play it. Exactly what did you buy? Nothing. You paid a fee to allow you to pay a fee to play a game for a limited period of time. And before you pipe in with "the game comes with 30 days free game time"... did the game cost you $15? No. If the game was $60, you should be able to play it for 4 months if game time alone was what you were buying.
THAT IS WHAT IS WRONG WITH SUBSCRIPTIONS!
It has nothing to do with how often you play, it has everything to do with the fact that you paid for a game that you don't actually own. Liken it to the old arcades... you paid a quarter to play Asteroids until you used up all your lives. That could be 10 seconds or 10 hours. You didn't buy the game first then start plunking quarters into it. If you're going to require quarters to play the game, the game should be free. If the game is not free, you can't charge people money to play it.
All this nonsense. If a subscription based game failed, it was the game that failed, not the payment model. @OP. If someone releases, in your opinion, the most epic MMORPG ever made, Completely destroys WoW, and re hooks you into it as if it were your 1st days back in EQ (or what ever game made you fall in love with the genre), you'd pay. We'd all pay......well, most of us probably would.
The reason why the Sub model is in decline is because there aren't any games worthy of it.
paying is optional in F2P. You don't have to pay for the other guy's free play if you don't want to.
That is the whole point of "free" in f2p, you know.
PS: I could not help but read your, "In my Country..." with a Yakov Smirnoff accent
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
I pay $85 a month for my Cell. I usually text, and browse the internet, but rarely talk. That $85 doesn't change unless I go over on data or buy something.
Your satelite tv subscription is $65+ typically. You don't watch TV 24/7 and there is really no guarantee you'll watch it daily. That fee doesn't change.
Not the best examples, but your health and auto insurance are paid monthly, regardless of whether or not you need to use it (yes, I know...it is required, but still the same idea)
$15 for a game is insignificant compared to the above. What, $15 is like 3 packs of cigarettes for a smoker? The average smoke spends more than that in a month....Just saying
It is just a matter of what you are willing to pay for.
Raquelis in various games
Played: Everything
Playing: Nioh 2, Civ6
Wants: The World
Anticipating: Everquest Next Crowfall, Pantheon, Elden Ring
Cost is irrelevant. To me it's a matter of justification. I paid $50, $60 or so for a game, I expect to be able to play the game! But they want me to pay extra, every month, to access the game I already paid for? Really? The whole sub model has been proven unnecessary by GW2. By the box, play forever, no subs. How do they make money? By selling optional non-P2W fluff in the cash shop, stuff you can do perfectly fine without. Does it work? They're making tons of money, so it works. Plus they've been updating content every two weeks and are now about to release in China.
Justification. You can no longer justify making me pay a sub fee, regardless of the amount, to access a game I paid for off the shelf to play.
Oderint, dum metuant.
And the answer to that depends on the competition.
I pay like $45 for high speed internet (i get like unlimited 30Mbps) and if there is another company offering the same thing for less, i will go for that. I can afford $45, but there is no reason to pay even a cent more than i need to.
The same goes for MMO. I can afford $15 but why would i pay even a cent when i can get the same or more fun for free? It would be better use for that $15 to buy 3 coffees or a IMAX movie ticket.
Exactly, this is why subscriptions don't work and why I support Buy to Play with DLC.
Downloaded Content can make them money without having to resort to Pay to Win. Make us quest and raid for our gear and cosmetics, our mounts and our pets, our special spells etc.
Make us do hard challenging class and racial quests to attain our stuff. Force us to play not pay.
Why do people pay for DLC on console games, but expect free to play on the pc? Everyone knows you pay for console games, and it isn't subscription fees!!
Sure, you get to play demos, but you don't get the entire game for free!!
That being said, I think buy to play would solve all of the issues of power leveling, and feeling forced into getting the most out of your money so you can cancel your subscription and quit in time for the "next big thing's" release.
Every new mmo that releases people have to quit their old subscriptions in order to play it! Companies shouldn't expect rotational turn over of the subscription roulette (aka wow's 1-3 month wonders who quit every expansion), and they should encourage loyalty and longevity, by allowing us to login and play when our subscription is turned off, but making us lose our beneficial "perks".
This is only done correctly by a few games, like Rift and Tera, and Lord of the Rings Online which allows you to grind for turbine points by actually playing the game.
No one should ever feel forced and rushed in a game, they should feel relaxed and happy!
Allow people to do what they have time for. Allow soloists to get fabled high quality equipment, but make it hard and challenging quest lines, with many expected deaths. Make it take a high amount of effort!! Why should raiders have the best gear? Make raiding in a way easier, because many people are helping you, and soloists would have to do every single step themselves!
Everyone thinks games need to be easy, because no one has time, why not just have games that are friendly to casuals without time, by taking sub fees away and instead creating very hard challenging content? Allow people who need that extra help on the content to ask for other players for help, or buy a downloaded mercenary or something to help them (only they would have to actually earn it before it works!) .
WoW is the prime guilty party here. They have a blizzard marketplace shop for RMT, while being a subscription game!! You can't earn any of those items in game, they are all exclusives.
Any subscription game released will probably sooner or later sell extra RMT Exclusives on the side, so what is the subscription really for? Why not just release DLC that allows you to earn these items in-game, instead of rewarding rich people?
Or, the rediculously low drop rates on mounts in WoW, that you can't even earn after killing a raid boss 100 or 300 times, because its a 0.25% drop rate for that mount. What's the point?
There's simply no reason to have a subscription, just give us faster content updates that we can pay for. Back when Sony tried the $5 adventure pack mini expansion idea, I actually bought all 3 and thought it was a good idea. It's way better than paying a subscription monthly!!!
Why can't we get updates? Simply because games like WoW are lazy. Almost never updates, and millions are paying subscription fees monthly!! We haven't had an update for the past half a year or more. You get maybe 3 content updates or less every 2 years with WoW. Subscriptions simply have no point and no value. Free games like Rift give constant world events and reasons to login, WoW hasn't added a single new item to their World Events for the past 3 or so years.
They rely on pointless grinding and lockouts to entice you to keep coming back, as well as low loot drop rates. While other free games actually add fun and exciting content!
Unfortunately, its just hard to show people sometimes the nature of mmos and why subscriptions just don't work...
Sony used to be subscription with their games, they haven't stopped updating content and adding new things because they went free, they remain working hard just as always!! Lord of the Rings Online is making 5 times more money being free than they ever were as a sub game!!
It is time to let old archaic business models die, and accept that a la carte purchases and downloaded extra content is the best way to go now. So, we can all find time to play our games and enjoy them, regardless of if we have more time or more money.