Sweet!

I look forward to checking it out.

incredible this, its less than 2 weeks ago they claimed they aint planning on going free to play, on the boards.

Wow, and they are doing it so quick?  Have to wait and see, but this is going to be a big change with both Lotro and EQ II in the f2p arena.

The stupid thing here is they're not applying it to existing servers.  Sony is always retarded about servers and keeping things consistent.  If they don't apply it to existing servers it sucks and they're missing major items that I think they should include... like purchasing character slots (best change ever for alt-itis... *waves to COH/COV*.)  If the cash shop items aren't better than legendary then I have no issues with them.  Gives an early head up and later in the game when things get more difficult you gotta earn your stripes normally like everyone else.

This SHOULD be applied globally though because what's going to happen is people are going to end up on the P2P servers and can't get to F2P (and vice versa) servers and such... which is going to suck.

I find it funny how EQ1, the game that came out 5 years before this one by the same company, isn't FTP, when this one is...

Originally posted by Hedeon

incredible this, its less than 2 weeks ago they claimed they aint planning on going free to play, on the boards.

Hardly inredible. How many companies announce stuff like this when asked questions? They'd rather do it on their own terms.

And plus, EQ2 isn't going F2P, not really. They aren't switching the current game over to it, like is happening to LOTRO, they basically spinning off a new version of it that is F2P.  If you are an EQ2 player, it won't affect you at all, presumably, unless you want it to.  Whereas if you liked the current LOTRO model, you're SOL.

Originally posted by Dionysus187

Originally posted by Terikan3

If you think this is the end of the sub model, keep in mind that EQ2 was a failure just like lotro and DDO.  It may share a namesake with a game that was important and successful, but the sequel was not.

 

EQ2 is making a profit, how is that a failure? Do you consider success being close or tied with the most successful MMO? because if you do that is quite ignorant and short sighted.

 

Come on man, EQ2 hemorrhaged players and merged servers in the first year.  It may not be TOTAL failure, but it is failure none the less.  The trend for EQ2 has been slow and gradual failure for several years now.   Just like you say a game doesn't have to be the biggest success in the industry to be successful, it also doesn't have to be the biggest failure to still be a failure.

Cutting services and resources while increasing pricing and money grabs might make some profit, but it is certainly not a model for success.  That type of practice can only be sustained for so long, which strangely enough looks to be at an end right about now. 

Originally posted by trancejeremy

Originally posted by Hedeon

incredible this, its less than 2 weeks ago they claimed they aint planning on going free to play, on the boards.

Hardly inredible. How many companies announce stuff like this when asked questions? They'd rather do it on their own terms.

And plus, EQ2 isn't going F2P, not really. They aren't switching the current game over to it, like is happening to LOTRO, they basically spinning off a new version of it that is F2P.  If you are an EQ2 player, it won't affect you at all, presumably, unless you want it to.  Whereas if you liked the current LOTRO model, you're SOL.

 

sitting reading about it, if this had been 2 or 3 years ago Id most likely had moved on to it - their most expensive is a 200$/year + 500sc/month (sc being their cashshop "virtual money" worth 5$ - so maybe the newest expansion would be possible to buy mainly through those extra money, woould have to see if they restrict the station coins on that kind of purchases tho)

200$ being 13, 333...$/month...aint bad for it + good to read free to play(ers) is abit restricted in chat channels, even if very lightly.

$200 / 12 months = 16.66/month. 

to the same as above...find it weird how free to play(ers) will really not be that wanted in groups - non of the buffing classes allowed, and only allowed to play with low tier spell quality and gear, doesnt affect low lvl that much, but in the erh 60+? I bet there will be LF class x, gold members only or higher heh.

Originally posted by Daffid011

Originally posted by Dionysus187

Originally posted by Terikan3

If you think this is the end of the sub model, keep in mind that EQ2 was a failure just like lotro and DDO.  It may share a namesake with a game that was important and successful, but the sequel was not.

 

EQ2 is making a profit, how is that a failure? Do you consider success being close or tied with the most successful MMO? because if you do that is quite ignorant and short sighted.

 

Come on man, EQ2 hemorrhaged players and merged servers in the first year.  It may not be TOTAL failure, but it is failure none the less.  The trend for EQ2 has been slow and gradual failure for several years now.   Just like you say a game doesn't have to be the biggest success in the industry to be successful, it also doesn't have to be the biggest failure to still be a failure.

Cutting services and resources while increasing pricing and money grabs might make some profit, but it is certainly not a model for success.  That type of practice can only be sustained for so long, which strangely enough looks to be at an end right about now. 

 

All a game needs to do to be successful is turn a profit. People forget that prior to WoW MMO's had subs below half a million and were huge successes. When EQ2 launched it was the most successful North American MMO ever. And it's still turning a profit today.

Hell, WWII Online is still going after more than a decade with only 10k subscribers. They continue to update the game. They couldn't do that if they weren't turning a profit. 

Failures would be Tabula Rasa, Auto Assault, Motor City Online, all games no longer here.

And what is or is not a success in the market is really irrelevent as long as you enjoy playing the game.

Think further, one of the reasons people dont want to be on a F2P server is , if you want to be on the top you have to spend MUCH more then the 15 dollar a month :) I know people that spend 3000 dollar a week on a F2P game ( in this case atlantica online )

So in the long run you are far more expensive on a F2P server :)

Free 2 play is everything exept free ^^

Atleast good thing they kept both server models seperate ! Very smart

I think Eq2 is doing it smarter than LotRO by keeping the two servers separate. It will be interesting to see which is the bigger success. P2P vs F2P on the same exact game.

Originally posted by Novusod

I think Eq2 is doing it smarter than LotRO by keeping the two servers separate. It will be interesting to see which is the bigger success. P2P vs F2P on the same exact game.

Yep, just think how happy all those Landroval players would have been if they knew they wouldn't be forced to play with the F2P mouth breathers, would've saved Turbine some grief and lost subs.

Originally posted by eyeswideopen

Originally posted by Novusod

I think Eq2 is doing it smarter than LotRO by keeping the two servers separate. It will be interesting to see which is the bigger success. P2P vs F2P on the same exact game.

Yep, just think how happy all those Landroval players would have been if they knew they wouldn't be forced to play with the F2P mouth breathers, would've saved Turbine some grief and lost subs.

Actually splitting the servers is a really bad idea and if you read the EQ2 forum you will see that people are really upset about it.

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?&topic_id=483444  

Originally posted by eyeswideopen

Originally posted by Novusod

I think Eq2 is doing it smarter than LotRO by keeping the two servers separate. It will be interesting to see which is the bigger success. P2P vs F2P on the same exact game.

Yep, just think how happy all those Landroval players would have been if they knew they wouldn't be forced to play with the F2P mouth breathers, would've saved Turbine some grief and lost subs.

Yup. I would still be playing the game if such was the case. Landroval was the server I played on and  I do feel sorry  for the RP folks once the bunny hopping morons take over the Pony. A lot of nice people are getting the shaft.

Originally posted by Papadam

Originally posted by eyeswideopen

Originally posted by Novusod

I think Eq2 is doing it smarter than LotRO by keeping the two servers separate. It will be interesting to see which is the bigger success. P2P vs F2P on the same exact game.

Yep, just think how happy all those Landroval players would have been if they knew they wouldn't be forced to play with the F2P mouth breathers, would've saved Turbine some grief and lost subs.

Actually splitting the servers is a really bad idea and if you read the EQ2 forum you will see that people are really upset about it.

http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/posts/list.m?&topic_id=483444  

 

the bad part imo being you cant transfer off the F2P servers, only to it - in abit limited form, which really means no new comers will come, but as several stated on this forum, live EQ2 servers really isnt that great, when it come to new characters...so dont think its a good thing for P2P servers, but think for newcomers it could be.

I sux at math btw, 16,666... yus with the station cash tho it will be 11,6 + 5 $/month, locked to the cash shop, on self revive potions (got to be one of the worse ideas for a itemshop...granted dont have that much experience with them)

Seems like a really interesting model. The only thing I dont get is if they're running the 2 versions parallel then why on earth would you go 'Gold'/Sub $15 for the F2P servers when your actually getting less for your money and a server where people can buy some items etc....?

I think it's really clever from SOE

One question before I make up my mind on this...

Is everything that is eventually offered on the EQX servers for RL cash going to be put on vendors in game for in game money on the live servers?

If they do this, and merge the existing servers, I support the move.