| 85 posts found | |
|---|---|
|
VikingGamer
Advanced Member
Joined: 7/08/10
The strong are sometimes wrong but the weak are never free. |
8/16/12 12:51:27 PM#41
With the change in the old world, are any of the old vanilla raids even still accessible at 60? If the game was free to play up to 60 and you could still do some of these old raids I think it would create a sub population that would enjoy it. But it might be small. They might want to try to concentrate such a population onto a handful of servers. I don't see why not. If the content already exist it takes nothing to "deliver" it. These players might end up monitizing by picking up a mount or pet in the store. In fact, I would say, they should offer vanilla for free and then charge a bit for the expansions as if they were DLC but still not charge a sub until you get to MoP. The Law of Conservation of Stupidity: |
|
8/16/12 12:56:08 PM#42
F2P is for the dogs. I don't understand everyone's thinking. Is everyone really that broke that they are pushing F2P on everyone and every thing?
I'm starting to get a tad bit frustrated over all this F2P wave seemingly going on here at MMORPG.
I mean I commented on the game's cash shop and another forum about it costing 2 pounds for 1 hour of buffs and holy cripes I got flamed to no end about it being "pay to win." Ok? If it is pay to win, ANET still needs to make some more income then original box sales. Otherwise, you personally, over time become a leech on their income. |
|
|
8/16/12 1:01:35 PM#43
Lets just stop and think about this article. 10% of P2W games has paying customers. That would require those 10% to purchase $150 a month just to compete with the current business model.
P2W isn't for games that have a large number of subscribers. It is for P2P games that have failed.
|
|
|
8/16/12 1:30:12 PM#44
If Pandas doesn'y have good box sales make it f2p... otherwise bleed them dry with subs and cash shop. If people are dumb enough to pay for it Blizzard should just keep on taking their money.
|
|
|
8/16/12 1:33:15 PM#45
Consider how much of the pre-60 content already got retrofitted into the nostalgia raid o' the week....Why not. Your pre-60 includes a lot of cataclysm content for free, however...might cause a stir among the bean-counters. |
|
|
8/16/12 2:12:36 PM#46
Yes, it should go F2P. Most every sub game should. It should go Aion or Perfect World type of F2P, but it doesn't have to. They really don't have to do anything they don't want to. Even though they are bleeding subs somewhat it always seems their players come back because there is nothing out there better for them. RIFT is the closest thing that offers challenging raid based content and it's nowhere near as large yet, doesn't have the brand recognition, and requires a much higher end system to enjoy the game. Also people keep mentioning 9-10 million subs, but I don't think that is right, is it? It's 3 - 4 million subs in North America and Europe with Asia (the larger player base making up the other 5 - 6 million) buying time slots not monthly recurring fees. So it's not really accurate to say 9 - 10 million recurring subs. |
|
|
8/16/12 3:20:27 PM#47
"and monetize it" is rapidly becoming one of the most chilling phrases in the English language.
|
|
|
8/16/12 3:29:09 PM#48
It doesn't matter if they buy expacs all at once or one at a time, they will end up spending close to a $100. More than $100 if they use the Blizzard store. Blizzard has pretty much tapped the market for people who would be willing to buy the game and all the xpacs. They didn't have 10 million people playing since 2006, they've just stopped gaining as many new players as they have been. Now, I don't think Blizzard needs to do a longer free trial, I just don't think it would hurt the game to do it. It could possibly benefit the game by getting more people playing. Join the League For Gamers. |
|
|
8/16/12 3:42:56 PM#49
I like subscription models, it helps restrain me from spending way more a month then I should. 15$ a month is fine, but I have played f2p and end up spending 3$ here..4$ here....end of the moth I have spent 50 bucks on stuff I will use for the month cause I thought it was cool and then is buried in my inventory. |
|
|
8/16/12 4:00:20 PM#50
free to play till 60 would be a very good thing
|
|
|
8/16/12 7:12:29 PM#51
It would be a great idea. And for the oh they have 9.1million subs here's the thing Aion had 11 million yet they went f2p and now their population went up to 16million and they are making more money than they did off of subscriptions alone. People are willing to spend more on a cash shop a week than what blizzard is making now just in one month.
|
|
|
8/16/12 7:16:38 PM#52
Honestly, hard to say; although it would definitely give more use to the generally barren Level 1 - 60 zones.
|
|
|
8/16/12 7:48:43 PM#53
Wow what a shock,yet another worthless garbage article on this site pimping ftp for yet another game.
|
|
|
8/16/12 8:09:42 PM#54
Originally posted by Method01 From a players point of view, sure....From Blizzards point of view, I have no idea why they'd do this. |
|
|
8/16/12 8:48:45 PM#55
Sorry Bill, but you kinda screwed up. Again. There is no "unrestricted access to lvl 20". These are the restriction on the free version:
Btw, as someone already mentioned: if your suggestion gives access to the AH (well, at least the same AH as subscribers), this will mess up the economy completely, which alone is a reason for me to say no to this. There may be other issues to consider, but nothing major comes to mind right now.
|
|
|
8/17/12 12:16:36 AM#56
Originally posted by sniperman248 Where did you get those numbers? NCSoft took a loss in Q2 and partly blamed Aion and it's loss of subs and microtransactions. Nowhere those numbers that I've seen on any site, including NCSoft. Closest I have seen was back in 2009 when it had 4 mil in Korea and about 3 mil in Europe and America combined. They had a bit of a jump when it went FtP, but nowhere near that. As for WoW it peaked at just over 12 million players in 2011 and now a year and a half later down to 9.1 mil. That's the sharpest drop yet. Hell even before the polished turd Cata hit (and yes I played it and still play once in a while), it jumped almost a half a mil players. This time it's dropping. Looks like the rats are deserting the sinking ship. People are getting tired of the "same stuff, new package" thing. As for the "freemium" set up, it might keep it from bleeding all the way out. Up to 60, no restriction except maybe limiting how many mails or auctions can be done. Yea, it would mess with the economy for a short period, but would be better in the long run. Most of the economy in WoW now is higher level stuff anyway. Would actully improve the economy for the low range, Hell, I would make an account for just the 60 raids alone. |
|
|
8/17/12 2:21:31 AM#57
Why would they need to? Nearly everyone who wanted to try WoW already has. F2P is what you do when nobody will pay to play the crap you put out, as long as people are still paying for WoW AND buying stuff from the online store, I'm not really seeing the upside for Blizzard. Maybe after they lose another 8 million subs or so.
|
|
|
8/17/12 3:39:59 AM#58
NTY!
|
|
|
8/17/12 4:08:05 AM#59
If it was f2p 1-60, I'd find a guild to do Vanilla content. Though I'm sure it would be a cakewalk.
|
|
|
8/17/12 4:17:17 AM#60
Giving players free to play from levels 1 though 60 isn't such a bad idea. This would add more activity to the game in lower levels. Also, the fun factor increase quiet a bit when comparing when comparing content at level 20 and level 60. This will increase the likelyhood of those free to play players from wanting to buy other expansions and maybe even subscribing to the game in order to check out other content.
|
|