With the exception of WOW, those other titles were all in declining subscription mode and their conversion to fremium models are all considered to have revitalized or "saved" them by common consensus.
Actually, Wow is declining as much as the rest of them, Morhaime said they lost half a million players in 6 months a little while back (a month or so). They just have so many players that it isn't a disaster for them in the same way as it is for some other games.
But the only game we seen so far that is saved by changing payment method is DDO, the others did get in some fresh blood but saying it saved the games is just not true.
Yeah I agree , the only game that was probably " saved" as everyone puts it would be DDO .. Lotro has always had a solid user base and I believe it would still have even if it had not have gone FTP.
Lotro has had peaks and troughs all along with every new Book or Expansion added.
I disagree with the comments about F2P games being of lower quality.
Some I would say are better than many subscription based games.
Look at Xyson and Mortal Online to name just 2 games that I can't believe have a subscription due to the poor quality.
I think one of the only problems for most F2P games is the lack a a big IP behind them.
You can't deny the quality of games like Perfect World / Forsaken World.
You just picked two western market flops made by indie companies... and picked the two best F2P MMOs made by an eastern corporate giant that has considerable resources available.
If you're going to play that card, then let's compare WoW and Rift to the hundreds of terrible F2P MMOs out there and see who wins.
Then don't generalise, there a great examples of F2P games, just as there are bad examples of subscription based games.
All I'm seeing are comments about 'quality', well that's just not right.
Be more specific rather than just trashing every F2P game.
I was specific, every single Western MMOs that is developed as F2P has proven to be inferior. Name a single western AAA quality MMO that was F2P at release... you can't. Every single AAA western MMO that is F2P, was P2P to begin with, that's the entire reason they're AAA quality to begin with.
Despite what people want to believe, the western market simply does not accept the F2P cashshop model as much as the eastern market. As such, F2P in the western market will for the forseeable future lag behind when it comes to recouping development costs after release, compared to a straight box sale + subscription model in the early life of an MMO.
I've got to LOL.
Are you telling me I have to debate this on YOUR terms?
It HAS to be this, it HAS to be that.
I was making a point about all the people saying F2P is low quality, I can name 20 or more that are far from low quality.
Now we have people saying they tried this and that, saw a cash shop and uninstalled. Did they even make it past level 10 or check to see if the cash shop made a difference to gameplay?
I think it's piss poor to debate on a forum when you have no idea of what you are talking about, or worse, try to funnel people's response in the way you just did.
This website focuses more on the western MMO market, so yeah, I'm going to debate about F2P MMOs status within the western MMO market. As far as MMOs go, the eastern market is a completely different animal from the western market. That's why so many game developers from both markets often rely on partnering with companies that are already established in the other resgion to handle modifying and releasing the game for their respective region.
You claim you can name 20 or more F2P games that aren't low quality... again, of those how many of those MMOs are from the east? Of the ones that aren't, how many of them were initially developed as P2P MMOs?
Why am I asking the above? Because it has everything to do with the region the MMO is developed in and for. The western market has a significantly different taste for F2P than the eastern market does. Particularly that western gamers aren't as accepting or willing to make use of cash shops... hell the fact that so many people are 'trying a F2P games and then uninstalling after seeing the cash shop' is proof of that. This is why there are no western born AAA quality MMOs that are released as F2P, because doing so simply does not yield anywhere near the initial sales revenue as releasing the same game as a box sale plus subscription.
F2P may be doing great in the eastern market, but in the western market of MMOsF2P has only made headway in terms of trying to breath life into games that are already late in their life cycle.
No matter what people say, I still prefer good old monthly subscription mmorpgs. If a game is good, I have no trouble supporting the company and paying ~15€/month from it. With F2P games, I hate when people have content restrictions and some weird sh*t like that. "You can't play with this class and NO, your buddy can't join you for that quest since he hasn't paid from it. And WTF? Your wallet can't fit more than 2 Gold since you aren't a premium member..."
It's full game or no game for me. And if you bring in the cash shop, I'll move my carcass to somewhere else.
I think alot of people have just missed the nail head with the whole F2P thing. If you look at the MMO as a global entity where is the biggest customer base?
It's in Asia.
Name a subscription game that has done well in Asia. WOW doesn't count because in Asia it doesn't have a subscription payment method.
Thats why WOW has 12 million accounts and the next best subscription game has slightly over 600 thousand with most subscription games having less than 200 thousand. The subscription market just isn't big enough.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
I disagree with the comments about F2P games being of lower quality.
Some I would say are better than many subscription based games.
Look at Xyson and Mortal Online to name just 2 games that I can't believe have a subscription due to the poor quality.
I think one of the only problems for most F2P games is the lack a a big IP behind them.
You can't deny the quality of games like Perfect World / Forsaken World.
You just picked two western market flops made by indie companies... and picked the two best F2P MMOs made by an eastern corporate giant that has considerable resources available.
If you're going to play that card, then let's compare WoW and Rift to the hundreds of terrible F2P MMOs out there and see who wins.
Then don't generalise, there a great examples of F2P games, just as there are bad examples of subscription based games.
All I'm seeing are comments about 'quality', well that's just not right.
Be more specific rather than just trashing every F2P game.
I was specific, every single Western MMOs that is developed as F2P has proven to be inferior. Name a single western AAA quality MMO that was F2P at release... you can't. Every single AAA western MMO that is F2P, was P2P to begin with, that's the entire reason they're AAA quality to begin with.
Despite what people want to believe, the western market simply does not accept the F2P cashshop model as much as the eastern market. As such, F2P in the western market will for the forseeable future lag behind when it comes to recouping development costs after release, compared to a straight box sale + subscription model in the early life of an MMO.
I've got to LOL.
Are you telling me I have to debate this on YOUR terms?
It HAS to be this, it HAS to be that.
I was making a point about all the people saying F2P is low quality, I can name 20 or more that are far from low quality.
Now we have people saying they tried this and that, saw a cash shop and uninstalled. Did they even make it past level 10 or check to see if the cash shop made a difference to gameplay?
I think it's piss poor to debate on a forum when you have no idea of what you are talking about, or worse, try to funnel people's response in the way you just did.
This website focuses more on the western MMO market, so yeah, I'm going to debate about F2P MMOs status within the western MMO market. As far as MMOs go, the eastern market is a completely different animal from the western market. That's why so many game developers from both markets often rely on partnering with companies that are already established in the other resgion to handle modifying and releasing the game for their respective region.
You claim you can name 20 or more F2P games that aren't low quality... again, of those how many of those MMOs are from the east? Of the ones that aren't, how many of them were initially developed as P2P MMOs?
Why am I asking the above? Because it has everything to do with the region the MMO is developed in and for. The western market has a significantly different taste for F2P than the eastern market does. Particularly that western gamers aren't as accepting or willing to make use of cash shops... hell the fact that so many people are 'trying a F2P games and then uninstalling after seeing the cash shop' is proof of that. This is why there are no western born AAA quality MMOs that are released as F2P, because doing so simply does not yield anywhere near the initial sales revenue as releasing the same game as a box sale plus subscription.
F2P may be doing great in the eastern market, but in the western market of MMOsF2P has only made headway in terms of trying to breath life into games that are already late in their life cycle.
You and I know I can't name 20 western F2P mmo's, good or bad. That wasn't my argument though.
Moving on, those western mmo's revamped for F2P are actually the worst examples of Pay to Win that I have seen in the genre.
I agree that the western mmo's have a way to go before being more accepted but I would bet my left boll### that there are games already in development, built from the ground up for this model.
As I briefly touched on in my first post though, imagine a well made F2P title on a great IP like Star Wars and that's where you'll start getting acceptance and interest.
Once the western venture capitalists and corps get their head around the idea, I feel this is the direction we are headed in.
This has been said before and will likely be said again. There are very well made games that were designed as "free to play". The best example is still guildwars as I see it. Guildwars 2 seems like it will be a success based on most previews and reactions. Really there's nothing wrong with ftp there is just bad implementations just like there are well and poorly managed websites. Look at websites as another example there are paid and free. The free ones seem to do quite well and have high quality content just like the one you're reading.
I think alot of people have just missed the nail head with the whole F2P thing. If you look at the MMO as a global entity where is the biggest customer base?
It's in Asia.
Name a subscription game that has done well in Asia. WOW doesn't count because in Asia it doesn't have a subscription payment method.
Thats why WOW has 12 million accounts and the next best subscription game has slightly over 600 thousand with most subscription games having less than 200 thousand. The subscription market just isn't big enough.
Lineage 1, 2 and Aion? Model might be somewhat different, but they certainly aren't your typical cash shop designed MMO's
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
There is a world of difference between games like Lotro going "freemium" and a traditional free-to-play game.
I agree. Traditional Free-to-play games (F2P) are lacking in content, depth, and polish. Often they feel like sorely undercooked games and when coming from a non-english speaking developer the translations are often broken or unreadable at first. Also the F2P model has been difficult for me because you'll see a F2P game and wana join it only to find out its a European version and that america has a differant version from a diffearnt distributor. Then it takes months for patches to go from their origional nation, to the secondary markets.
On the other hand if you play a game like WoW which has a subscription fee, it dosn't matter what part of the world you play in, your game will always be updated the same day as the rest of the world.
I do however like the freemium version. However as stated above most of those games were built as P2P games and when the P2P model didn't work out for them they found new life by freeing up their origonal content. I have a lifetime subscription to STO, and though I did pay for my freemium status I will say that I have bought goodies from cryptic's c-store. In truth I will never buy a lifetime subscription to a game but STO has tought me that the freemium model works and more games could be initialy developed with this in mind. If I'm not busy subscribing to a game then I don't mind dropping $15-$30 bucks on a game from time to time to get new content, ships, costumes, or even species to play as. In the end freemuim companies have found that their games last much longer than if they purely stuck with the P2P model. Games like DDO, LotRO, APB (it did die) and other would have perished long ago if they hadn't gone Freemium.
I like subscriptions and with the freemium model I have the option to do so, or if I'd rather just pick and choose the content I want I can do that as well so in a way I "own" my access to the game rather than "renting it". The freemium model allows people to chose if they want to "lease" the content or "finance" it. Similar to buying a car or a house, if you arn't sure you'll want to be tied down to it then you lease it, but if you know you love the object and will keep it forever then go for the finance method and own it. I think the future of MMOing is the freemium way. I don't think it'll happen over night, perhaps in 5-10 years we'll see MMOs launching with the freemium model rather than reverting to it when the P2P style dosn't hold up for them.
I still look at a game like Forsaken World that is polished and already has a free expansion on the horizon. Not only that but there is tons of stuff to do in the game. From my expeience and from every review on this game you don't need to pay a penny to play the game. The other pro to this game is its not a race to max level as they just had a person hit max level 3 days ago and now there raising the level cap to 80. Its not the game for everyone but to say free 2 play means low quality is not an accurate arguement. How many game do you subscribe to that have a free expansion that rivals the feature list of paid expansions within there first year. Within 5-6 months at that.
So, "free to play" isn't really free? So why do companies use the term? Why is the term "f2p" parrotted by so many seemingly intelligent people here?
Two terms come to mind here. One, "you get what you pay for". Two, "if you want quality you have to pay for it".
The term, near as I can tell, was just adopted by Marketing departments because it sounds good in advertisements. Especially with the MMOs that have converted to "free-to-play" much time is spent in the forums correcting the misconceptions those advertisements promoted.
I really wish someone would come up with a more accurate term, but unless it fits the ads just as well and Marketing is happy, we will be stuck with "free-to-play".
Free to Play or F2P was coined in the 90's as a marketting term to indicate a game that could be obtained and played without any payment. It was a differentiation from 'sharware' or 'triaware' that indicated that it was a full product that was available for no fee. The comparable products at the time were Pay to Play (P2P) because they required that you purchase the game before you could use it.
The basic marketting structure of F2P is that the customer can experince the product FIRST, before putting down any money. This was very popular because it was common for customers to put down $40/50/60 for a product, only to find that they did not enjoy it, and had no further interest in the product. It is a marketting answer to buyers reget.
F2P has no relationship to monthly fees. In fact the most popular F2P games (in the western market) were all based on monthly fees. The addition of microtransactions did not become popular until F2P was already well established as a success.
Well the true fact is, that none of these games are free, you eventually have to spend something. Yes, on occasion, there are rare individuals who manage to spend nothing.
There also seems to be a great difference between the games that have adopted the freemium model and the rest of the f2p market. Freemium is more like a free trial than a free game.
I look at it like a grocery store. The usage of the grocery store is free. You can go in...hang out....talk to people...browse stuff, but if you want to eat, take home, or use an item there you have to pay. As opposed to P2P games that are stores that stop you at the door and charge you a fee to come in and then you can use the items inside. Depending on how much you want to "use" it might be cheaper to F2P instead of P2P or if you want to shop different stores F2P might be better.
Wow ruined the P2P market by gobbling up most mmo gamers and then the F2P came along and picked many wow burned players up..
The competition is going to get tougher and only the strongest and most competitive will survive as these little F2P games are made to be addictive and fun not mentioning you can quit and pick them up again later without being charged $15 just to revisit them...
Wow ruined the P2P market by gobbling up most mmo gamers and then the F2P came along and picked many wow burned players up..
The competition is going to get tougher and only the strongest and most competitive will survive as these little F2P games are made to be addictive and fun not mentioning you can quit and pick them up again later without being charged $15 just to revisit them...
Oh the times they are a changin...
Odviously it was WoW's fault that no one else made a quality game to pull people way. Do you blame WoW when it rains too?
There is only one huge problem with the F2P model:
Special advantages from buying items. I'm not talking about "Hey you can get this set easy by buying items." I'm talking about "Hey you can get this SUPER AWESOME EXTRA GEAR that no one else will ever see unless they pay money too!"
Example: Miracle Cubes in Maplestory. It's basically the only way to become "1337" in Maplestory now. Miracle Cubes will eventually, after you spend like $300 an item, make your gear give +27% to your main stat, per item. Anyone who cannot pay money for the game, will NEVER see these items. They are too expensive on the market, and cubes are far too expensive to once in a while buy and get lucky. If you don't have gear that gives at least a total of +50% to your main stat, you're completely useless and unwanted, but to get that, you MUST spend money. It's the simple truth. There is no way you're going to get a good identified gear without spending money.
On the other hand, we have Eden Eternal, which allows players to buy gear from the Cash Shop, but that gear is possible to get without buying items. It is 100% obtainable, and it's not really that hard either.
That's the difference between F2P models now. Some are bullcrap, giving paying players an exception advantage over non-playing ones, and then there are the other model where players who pay get an advantage, but it's more than possible to get strong without paying. All F2P games should follow the second model, but 95% don't.
I quite like the f2p/subscrption hybrid model (aka unlimited but restricted free trial), enticing more players into a world, more subscriptions or 1 off purchases for content and stuff is a good idea and I would welcome it for any MMO large or small
True f2p games where paying = winning are something I stay away from
No the future does not look bright for people who like subscription games, f2p is not the savior is the oppisite. Free to play is a contradiction anyway, and so is subscribers.
I hope no Triple A games go F2P. If they suck, and then switch, sure...but at least start out with a sub....Id rather one monthly fee come out for the same content as joe over there.
I don't want to pay 3 dollars 10 times a month to play a game, to keep up with the other players who have deep pockets. Maybe its better for money, and thats all anyone cares about...
I disagree with the comments about F2P games being of lower quality.
Some I would say are better than many subscription based games.
Look at Xyson and Mortal Online to name just 2 games that I can't believe have a subscription due to the poor quality.
I think one of the only problems for most F2P games is the lack a a big IP behind them.
You can't deny the quality of games like Perfect World / Forsaken World.
Actually yes, yes I can deny the quality of Forsaken World. It's a grindy, boring game that has auto-pathing and endless repeatable dailies that you must do to have any chance of levelling. It's a typical FTP ploy to slow levelling until the player is so frustrated they buy those XP potions.
Really? Can you recommend one? I want to play a good one?
I want one that has as much to do as a Sub game, I want to play one that has decent PVE and PVP. I don't want endless repetious grinds that require you to run iTunes in the background in order to maintain your sanity. I want decent and complicated class and combat mechanics that require me to really dig in and learn my class and how to optimize rotations and builds for optimal performance. I want class options that allow me to adapt and change my playstyle if I want to. I want a large helpful community, I want endgame and metagame options to keep me busy.
I'd even be willing to spend a reasonable amount of money each month ($10-$20)
Great article and to some extent I agree some of the F2P game purveyors are saving some great properties by bringing them in the Free 2 Play fold, such as Gamers First with APB: Reloaded and very shortly Fallen Earth.
I think to be successfull as a company running F2P games there are a few simple rules to follow.
1) Only offer cosmetic & jump the grind type items that do not impact gameplay. By Jump the grind I mean you can offer craft recipes, weapons and armor but the requirements to use them should still be inline with what you would need to equip their ingame earned counterparts. Naturally the damage and stats should not be any better than the equivalent versions you an earn ingame by raiding/grinding/Auction house purchase etc.
2) No pay to win items obviously. No flawless +6 damage crystals exclusively on the cash shop.
3) Anything that is not simply cosmetic on the cash shop must be able to be somehow earned ingame even if it requires the most idiotic of grinds. This includes things like skill resets, make them grindy to get if you must but still make it so truly free players can get them.
4) In your cosmetic items do not "lock slots" to cash shop only items. By that I mean if you have a face equipment slot, do not make it so the only items for that slot must be bought from the cash shop. Cosmetic cash shop items should be nice and attractive on their own merits without resorting to certain clothing/item slots only being available from the cash shop.
Ideally the best gear (Top Tier) in games should only be earned by playing, not necessarily by grinding or playing the most hours. However this flies in the face of both most modern MMO designs where grinding is how you get the best gear but it also flies in the face of the cash shop convenience items where these sell precisely because some people do not have the time to or simply do not want to grind 600 hours to get them.
Comments
Yeah I agree , the only game that was probably " saved" as everyone puts it would be DDO .. Lotro has always had a solid user base and I believe it would still have even if it had not have gone FTP.
Lotro has had peaks and troughs all along with every new Book or Expansion added.
This website focuses more on the western MMO market, so yeah, I'm going to debate about F2P MMOs status within the western MMO market. As far as MMOs go, the eastern market is a completely different animal from the western market. That's why so many game developers from both markets often rely on partnering with companies that are already established in the other resgion to handle modifying and releasing the game for their respective region.
You claim you can name 20 or more F2P games that aren't low quality... again, of those how many of those MMOs are from the east? Of the ones that aren't, how many of them were initially developed as P2P MMOs?
Why am I asking the above? Because it has everything to do with the region the MMO is developed in and for. The western market has a significantly different taste for F2P than the eastern market does. Particularly that western gamers aren't as accepting or willing to make use of cash shops... hell the fact that so many people are 'trying a F2P games and then uninstalling after seeing the cash shop' is proof of that. This is why there are no western born AAA quality MMOs that are released as F2P, because doing so simply does not yield anywhere near the initial sales revenue as releasing the same game as a box sale plus subscription.
F2P may be doing great in the eastern market, but in the western market of MMOsF2P has only made headway in terms of trying to breath life into games that are already late in their life cycle.
No matter what people say, I still prefer good old monthly subscription mmorpgs. If a game is good, I have no trouble supporting the company and paying ~15€/month from it. With F2P games, I hate when people have content restrictions and some weird sh*t like that. "You can't play with this class and NO, your buddy can't join you for that quest since he hasn't paid from it. And WTF? Your wallet can't fit more than 2 Gold since you aren't a premium member..."
It's full game or no game for me. And if you bring in the cash shop, I'll move my carcass to somewhere else.
WoW isn't a F2P. It's one of the most successful. Neither is Everquest. DDO and LOTRO are freemium, not F2P. Sorry. So they don't count.
I think alot of people have just missed the nail head with the whole F2P thing. If you look at the MMO as a global entity where is the biggest customer base?
It's in Asia.
Name a subscription game that has done well in Asia. WOW doesn't count because in Asia it doesn't have a subscription payment method.
Thats why WOW has 12 million accounts and the next best subscription game has slightly over 600 thousand with most subscription games having less than 200 thousand. The subscription market just isn't big enough.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
There is nothing more dangerous than a true believer.
You and I know I can't name 20 western F2P mmo's, good or bad. That wasn't my argument though.
Moving on, those western mmo's revamped for F2P are actually the worst examples of Pay to Win that I have seen in the genre.
I agree that the western mmo's have a way to go before being more accepted but I would bet my left boll### that there are games already in development, built from the ground up for this model.
As I briefly touched on in my first post though, imagine a well made F2P title on a great IP like Star Wars and that's where you'll start getting acceptance and interest.
Once the western venture capitalists and corps get their head around the idea, I feel this is the direction we are headed in.
Lineage 1, 2 and Aion? Model might be somewhat different, but they certainly aren't your typical cash shop designed MMO's
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
I agree. Traditional Free-to-play games (F2P) are lacking in content, depth, and polish. Often they feel like sorely undercooked games and when coming from a non-english speaking developer the translations are often broken or unreadable at first. Also the F2P model has been difficult for me because you'll see a F2P game and wana join it only to find out its a European version and that america has a differant version from a diffearnt distributor. Then it takes months for patches to go from their origional nation, to the secondary markets.
On the other hand if you play a game like WoW which has a subscription fee, it dosn't matter what part of the world you play in, your game will always be updated the same day as the rest of the world.
I do however like the freemium version. However as stated above most of those games were built as P2P games and when the P2P model didn't work out for them they found new life by freeing up their origonal content. I have a lifetime subscription to STO, and though I did pay for my freemium status I will say that I have bought goodies from cryptic's c-store. In truth I will never buy a lifetime subscription to a game but STO has tought me that the freemium model works and more games could be initialy developed with this in mind. If I'm not busy subscribing to a game then I don't mind dropping $15-$30 bucks on a game from time to time to get new content, ships, costumes, or even species to play as. In the end freemuim companies have found that their games last much longer than if they purely stuck with the P2P model. Games like DDO, LotRO, APB (it did die) and other would have perished long ago if they hadn't gone Freemium.
I like subscriptions and with the freemium model I have the option to do so, or if I'd rather just pick and choose the content I want I can do that as well so in a way I "own" my access to the game rather than "renting it". The freemium model allows people to chose if they want to "lease" the content or "finance" it. Similar to buying a car or a house, if you arn't sure you'll want to be tied down to it then you lease it, but if you know you love the object and will keep it forever then go for the finance method and own it. I think the future of MMOing is the freemium way. I don't think it'll happen over night, perhaps in 5-10 years we'll see MMOs launching with the freemium model rather than reverting to it when the P2P style dosn't hold up for them.
I still look at a game like Forsaken World that is polished and already has a free expansion on the horizon. Not only that but there is tons of stuff to do in the game. From my expeience and from every review on this game you don't need to pay a penny to play the game. The other pro to this game is its not a race to max level as they just had a person hit max level 3 days ago and now there raising the level cap to 80. Its not the game for everyone but to say free 2 play means low quality is not an accurate arguement. How many game do you subscribe to that have a free expansion that rivals the feature list of paid expansions within there first year. Within 5-6 months at that.
Free to Play or F2P was coined in the 90's as a marketting term to indicate a game that could be obtained and played without any payment. It was a differentiation from 'sharware' or 'triaware' that indicated that it was a full product that was available for no fee. The comparable products at the time were Pay to Play (P2P) because they required that you purchase the game before you could use it.
The basic marketting structure of F2P is that the customer can experince the product FIRST, before putting down any money. This was very popular because it was common for customers to put down $40/50/60 for a product, only to find that they did not enjoy it, and had no further interest in the product. It is a marketting answer to buyers reget.
F2P has no relationship to monthly fees. In fact the most popular F2P games (in the western market) were all based on monthly fees. The addition of microtransactions did not become popular until F2P was already well established as a success.
Well the true fact is, that none of these games are free, you eventually have to spend something. Yes, on occasion, there are rare individuals who manage to spend nothing.
There also seems to be a great difference between the games that have adopted the freemium model and the rest of the f2p market. Freemium is more like a free trial than a free game.
I look at it like a grocery store. The usage of the grocery store is free. You can go in...hang out....talk to people...browse stuff, but if you want to eat, take home, or use an item there you have to pay. As opposed to P2P games that are stores that stop you at the door and charge you a fee to come in and then you can use the items inside. Depending on how much you want to "use" it might be cheaper to F2P instead of P2P or if you want to shop different stores F2P might be better.
Wow ruined the P2P market by gobbling up most mmo gamers and then the F2P came along and picked many wow burned players up..
The competition is going to get tougher and only the strongest and most competitive will survive as these little F2P games are made to be addictive and fun not mentioning you can quit and pick them up again later without being charged $15 just to revisit them...
Oh the times they are a changin...
Playing GW2..
Odviously it was WoW's fault that no one else made a quality game to pull people way. Do you blame WoW when it rains too?
I have no doubt that the genre will be more and more F2P based. I also have no doubt that themepark games will always be the dominant type of MMO...
This is a reality, one that sucks!
Remember Old School Ultima Online
There is only one huge problem with the F2P model:
Special advantages from buying items. I'm not talking about "Hey you can get this set easy by buying items." I'm talking about "Hey you can get this SUPER AWESOME EXTRA GEAR that no one else will ever see unless they pay money too!"
Example: Miracle Cubes in Maplestory. It's basically the only way to become "1337" in Maplestory now. Miracle Cubes will eventually, after you spend like $300 an item, make your gear give +27% to your main stat, per item. Anyone who cannot pay money for the game, will NEVER see these items. They are too expensive on the market, and cubes are far too expensive to once in a while buy and get lucky. If you don't have gear that gives at least a total of +50% to your main stat, you're completely useless and unwanted, but to get that, you MUST spend money. It's the simple truth. There is no way you're going to get a good identified gear without spending money.
On the other hand, we have Eden Eternal, which allows players to buy gear from the Cash Shop, but that gear is possible to get without buying items. It is 100% obtainable, and it's not really that hard either.
That's the difference between F2P models now. Some are bullcrap, giving paying players an exception advantage over non-playing ones, and then there are the other model where players who pay get an advantage, but it's more than possible to get strong without paying. All F2P games should follow the second model, but 95% don't.
---
This is but a brief parting.
I quite like the f2p/subscrption hybrid model (aka unlimited but restricted free trial), enticing more players into a world, more subscriptions or 1 off purchases for content and stuff is a good idea and I would welcome it for any MMO large or small
True f2p games where paying = winning are something I stay away from
I love this type of article, great idea
I am all for free to play, you can also say a similar model is available in retail games in the form of piracy lol
They cripple the bird's wing, and then condemn it for not flying as fast as they.Malcolm X
No the future does not look bright for people who like subscription games, f2p is not the savior is the oppisite. Free to play is a contradiction anyway, and so is subscribers.
I hope no Triple A games go F2P. If they suck, and then switch, sure...but at least start out with a sub....Id rather one monthly fee come out for the same content as joe over there.
I don't want to pay 3 dollars 10 times a month to play a game, to keep up with the other players who have deep pockets. Maybe its better for money, and thats all anyone cares about...
(-_-)
Actually yes, yes I can deny the quality of Forsaken World. It's a grindy, boring game that has auto-pathing and endless repeatable dailies that you must do to have any chance of levelling. It's a typical FTP ploy to slow levelling until the player is so frustrated they buy those XP potions.
Savior to some, great destroyer to others. What you see as a genre being "saved" I see as one that is being enslaved and left to rot.
"Free-to-Play is the Savior"
Really? Can you recommend one? I want to play a good one?
I want one that has as much to do as a Sub game, I want to play one that has decent PVE and PVP. I don't want endless repetious grinds that require you to run iTunes in the background in order to maintain your sanity. I want decent and complicated class and combat mechanics that require me to really dig in and learn my class and how to optimize rotations and builds for optimal performance. I want class options that allow me to adapt and change my playstyle if I want to. I want a large helpful community, I want endgame and metagame options to keep me busy.
I'd even be willing to spend a reasonable amount of money each month ($10-$20)
So...Whatchagot?
Great article and to some extent I agree some of the F2P game purveyors are saving some great properties by bringing them in the Free 2 Play fold, such as Gamers First with APB: Reloaded and very shortly Fallen Earth.
I think to be successfull as a company running F2P games there are a few simple rules to follow.
1) Only offer cosmetic & jump the grind type items that do not impact gameplay. By Jump the grind I mean you can offer craft recipes, weapons and armor but the requirements to use them should still be inline with what you would need to equip their ingame earned counterparts. Naturally the damage and stats should not be any better than the equivalent versions you an earn ingame by raiding/grinding/Auction house purchase etc.
2) No pay to win items obviously. No flawless +6 damage crystals exclusively on the cash shop.
3) Anything that is not simply cosmetic on the cash shop must be able to be somehow earned ingame even if it requires the most idiotic of grinds. This includes things like skill resets, make them grindy to get if you must but still make it so truly free players can get them.
4) In your cosmetic items do not "lock slots" to cash shop only items. By that I mean if you have a face equipment slot, do not make it so the only items for that slot must be bought from the cash shop. Cosmetic cash shop items should be nice and attractive on their own merits without resorting to certain clothing/item slots only being available from the cash shop.
Ideally the best gear (Top Tier) in games should only be earned by playing, not necessarily by grinding or playing the most hours. However this flies in the face of both most modern MMO designs where grinding is how you get the best gear but it also flies in the face of the cash shop convenience items where these sell precisely because some people do not have the time to or simply do not want to grind 600 hours to get them.
In No 1) I forgot to mention things like buying additional character slots.