Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
F2P games with CS work great for two groups
snapfusion
Member Posts: 954
I have a theory that F2P games work great for two groups of people. Those with no money (the group that really needs a free game). And those with disposible sums of cash that dont mind paying ridiculous amounts of money to experience a "complete" game playing a resonable amount of time.
Its the guy in the middle that loses. Tthe guy in the middle has to accept a half baked experience if he wants to stick to the 15 bucks a month plan. This is the core problem for me. And im not talking about games that allow you to pay 15 a month for the whole game and just have a restricted F2P model. I referring to the F2P games that shipped from day one as such and sport a sadistic CS thats needs to be fully utilized in order to experience all the game has to offer and to be able to achieve it in a reasonable amount of time.
And for those that are perfectly happy playing "part" of a game for "free" or grinding twice as long as a P2P while tossing your 15 bucks at the CS dont count in my opinion. Its the same as Subway suddenly making their sandwhichs half the size for the same price and offering the orginal size for more but you saying its okay because the reduced portion stilll fills me up. It doesnt change the fact you get less food for the same price as before.
Do you think this is an accurate assesment?
Comments
yes
Yes. From a sociology standpoint it's a fairly clear application of socialism. Those who have pay extra and receive bonuses for doing so, those who do not have can play at no cost. In a similar parallel, it is strictly a two tiered system. There is no middle class.
In a way, pay $100 per month = ruling elite.
I'm still searching for that elusive "fairly priced" cash shop.
It seems like the math that you guys are doing is that if only 10% of the playerbase is spending then in order for it to be a more profiltable system than subscription, the 10% has to each be paying 10x a sub price or more. That simply is not how it works. In a F2P, you have far more players than a subscription game - the volume of the spenders is what makes up the difference.
The type of spender you are referring to is called the 'whale' - he's the guy that spends big, usually for a short while. It is neither a common spending pattern nor a sustained spending pattern. The whale adds a desirable spike to the revenue but it is not the coreof the business model by any stretch.
The ARPPUs you're presenting may exist somewhere but they certainly are not the norm.
There isn't a "right" or "wrong" way to play, if you want to use a screwdriver to put nails into wood, have at it, simply don't complain when the guy next to you with the hammer is doing it much better and easier. - Allein
"Graphics are often supplied by Engines that (some) MMORPG's are built in" - Spuffyre
What about players of TF2 and LoL? F2P games which are balanced and complete and fun, regardless of how much you spend...
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Or add LoTRO, CO, etc.
But guess the ones that cry most about this topic and see it as a scrouge are the ones that are undereducated and think that Cash shop is always Pay to Win. I on average spend a lot less on mmos since I moved to some of the newer F2P converted games. And I've got a more relaxed time and more fun as I don't feel presured to login daily for a few hours to get my worth of money out of a game.
And it leaves me with more money to spend elsewhere, which certainly isn't bad with the current state of the economy.
"If all magic fails, rely on three feet of steel and a strong arm"
I agree with OP more or less. Don't want to go into details.
I am a bit lost as well. I am looking for a straigh priced game , where I for a fixed price like a subscription I get everything game has to offer. That include no item shop in any variant. Not even totally "vanity" items. I do care for every aspect of a game not only advantage in combat. Crafting , looks, travelling , etc also matters greatly for me.
I know and I actually played for a long time , mmorpg's that try to blend this , with giving you 'points' to spend in a shop in exchange for your subscription. Like Lotro (played in p2p and then f2p lotro overall for over a year) , but it does not work for me.
As for frequently used LoL , for me it is totally diffrent type of a game as it is MOBA type of a game.
I actually play LoL sometimes but I play it for totally diffrent reasons that I play mmorpg's so while CS works in LoL for me , in mmorpg CS does not work for me.
Pretty much.
The middle class gamer gets screwed by F2P.
Well in the examples you gave (LoTRO and CO) you are talking more about a freemium system than F2P. These systems have subs, and can generate decent revenue from those subs that than is bolstered with the addition of cash shops.
Where one draws the line on what is a "freemium" service and what is p2w is different for everyone, those who put $0 money into a freemium game tend to see every aspect that is not free as p2w, but those who pay a sub fee tend to have a higher tolerance for obvious reasons.
The only Free-to-Play game I have ever played was DDO. And I liked the model. Mainly because it gave me both options. I could play it free to play if I liked, OR I could subscribe and gain tokens every month to use in thier Game Store. Personally I like to set my 15 bucks aside and know that its spoken for and I have full access to my game. Rather than hit a level, area, or section of a game or want to try a class or race and suddenly not being able to continue because I didn't purchase that part.
Bugs me.
As well it opens up a lot of barriers when gaming with your friends. Hey man do you have such and such area? No. Damn, I guess we can try this area? No did that area a million times. Damn, well how about this area? Nope didn't buy it yet either. Damn.
From what I heard Guildwars did this a little different with all the extra content in expansions. I think that idea was solid and avoids the above problems. I have been tooling around the idea of trying that game out as I have nothing I really want to play right now.
But to sum up, I think giving both options is the way to go. That or set yourself up to be able to do it like guildwars right from the begining. That way your subs don't think the game is dying when it drops to Free-to-play.
If you have both options I think the sort of Pay-to-Win situations the OP was concerned with, rapidly disappear.