Trending Games | Guild Wars 2 | EverQuest Next | World of Warcraft | Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,920,874 Users Online:0
Games:760  Posts:6,312,954
Rift (Rift)
Trion Worlds | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 03/01/11)  | Pub:Trion Worlds
PVP:Yes | Distribution:Download | Retail Price:Free | Pay Type:Free | Monthly Fee:Free
System Req: PC | Out of date info? Let us know!

General Discussion Forum » The Pub at MMORPG.COM » If sub games make more money, why are they all going F2P?

10 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search
193 posts found
  Dreamo84

Defender of Worlds

Joined: 5/20/04
Posts: 3179

I actually still like MMORPGs

 
OP  6/30/13 1:48:44 AM#1

I'm not against P2P and I'm not against F2P I like all models(to some extent).

But I hear it tossed around a lot, that P2P games make more money and get more updates and are hence better. If this is true, why are almost all the P2P games going F2P? Do they just hate money?

Even Rift, which was every P2P die hard's anthem. "Look at Rift! That game pumps out so much content because it is P2P!" well...they went F2P. Were they tired of making all that money?

Other than WoW, Eve is one of the only hold outs with a sub. But even that game allows players to basically buy in game currency through the plex system. (buy tons of plex and sell it all in game) so it's not a pure P2P game with everyone equal regardless of money spent.

I am just curious what the reasoning here is. The P2P games are better, because they make more money, yet they all have to go F2P. Something feels off...

  Distopia

Drifter

Joined: 11/22/05
Posts: 15962

"what a boring life, HATING everything" -Gorilla Biscuits

6/30/13 1:53:46 AM#2
Never really heard it argued that they make more money (not  to say it doesn't happen)  I just don't think it's all that common. Most want subs simply because it costs less to have everything a game offers ( if it's based solely on a sub model). Even Hybrids like TOR etc.. Are better experiences (for the buck) with a sub over what it costs without.

For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  User Deleted
6/30/13 1:58:24 AM#3

Uhh, games eventually get old and start losing subscribers. The publishers make a big "Hoo-Hah" press release about going F2P and then all the grabasses who never paid any attention to the game before start trampling the elderly and small children to play yet another free game. They then leach off of that sucker until they're bored or until another game they never tried goes F2P and the cycle starts all over.

  Robokapp

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 4819

The only luck I had today was to have you as my opponent.

6/30/13 1:59:55 AM#4

wow isn't. eve isn't.

 

it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.

  Dreamo84

Defender of Worlds

Joined: 5/20/04
Posts: 3179

I actually still like MMORPGs

 
OP  6/30/13 2:10:36 AM#5

Personally, I just think there are too many MMOs and not enough players to sustain most games. MMOs are so different from every other genre, the games are made and then new ones come out but the only ones don't go away. The old MMOs are still trying to keep their players faithful to them, and the new ones are trying to lure them away.

I think back to the old days and how people were more committed to their MMOs but were we really? Or was it just a lack of choice?

I recall playing Meridian 59 with my brothers, and we were hardcore about that game. We loved it to death and had no intentions of quitting. But then EverQuest was coming out, we read the articles and saw the screenshots. So we hopped on board the EverQuest mobile! Then I believe it was another couple years or so until Asherons Call came out and my brothers and I decided to try that, and then Anarchy Online etc etc.

I think WoW and EverQuest 2 were the last two MMOs I actually spent more than a year on respectively.

The point of all this rambling, is back then MMOs took a long time to come out. We didn't have a new game every few months to try out and convert to. I think about the last year or so and I've had GW2, TSW, Defiance, Dragon's Prophet, Neverwinter, Marvel Heroes, and FFXIV beta all installed on my computer and launched/beta'd to different degrees. That's more MMOs than my first TEN years of MMO playing combined!

  Dreamo84

Defender of Worlds

Joined: 5/20/04
Posts: 3179

I actually still like MMORPGs

 
OP  6/30/13 2:12:02 AM#6
Originally posted by Robokapp

wow isn't. eve isn't.

 

it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.

So in your opinion, WoW and Eve are the only two good P2P MMOs ever made? And since you hate all F2P MMOs... is it your opinion that WoW and Eve are the only two good MMOs ever made, period?

  pfcgriff

Novice Member

Joined: 1/03/08
Posts: 24

6/30/13 2:15:19 AM#7

From what I've seen, F2P does make more money on less people. I'm not saying a F2P game with 5m players would make less money than P2P. There is a number where the number of players has reach to break even between F2P and P2P.

IE. Less than 500k the game would be better off F2P than P2P, but over that its more a question of what the Dev wants to do. Wow has an item shop, while very limited and silly expensive it is there. And the money they made from the like 5 mounts they have on there likely would buy them a very nice castle on a hill somewhere. 

The freemium model of  EQ2 is the only one that bothers me. A vast majority of the new art assets for armor and weapons are on the marketplace instead of being available VIA in game means. This is the only thing that worries me about EQN is that it will be a freemium model like EQ2 and have a cash shop where all the decent looking stuff ends up. 

So your sub may get you bonus xp or no queue time but the cool looking gear is all on the item shop. Sony has actually shown this plan with PS2 actaully, with the only difference between a Sub and a Free is bonus xp and no server queues.

 

  

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2548

World > Quest Progression

6/30/13 2:18:45 AM#8

IMO it's because most titles are more of the same.  While subs do give you a sustained income better suited to execute projects (content) you actually have to get people to pay for them.  Why pay for game A if game B looks and tastes similar without an upfront cost? Many players don't anymore due to how many are free(ish) and so you see more F2P conversions.  IMO these conversions are a way to get your core base that used to just pay 15.00 a month paying more so that others can play for free while keeping the doors open.  I'm concerned that as new F2P(ish) titles come out like EQN that the "whales" (see above) will move towards new waters and leave old titles to close or tighten the cash shop grip.

  MuffinStump

Novice Member

Joined: 8/06/03
Posts: 475

6/30/13 2:21:20 AM#9

All you are going to get in this thread are armchair economists and doomsayers.

Mmorpgs are notorious for keeping their numbers veiled either in terms of population (active accounts, forum accounts, registered accounts) or profit (other than quarterlies dependent upon knowledge of investment/upkeep).

Sometimes games fold even when they are turning a profit for various reasons such as occupying a valuable spot in some perceived gaming real estate or genre branding. I suppose if another project needs team members and the speculation is high on the new venture then they might even scrap the old for team resources. Hard to say what the monetary implications are for some of these decisions.

The mmo world seems primed for a massive shake-up in my opinion which is worthless as I sit in this armchair (babbling as I take a break from reviewing a project set)

  Aelious

Elite Member

Joined: 9/27/11
Posts: 2548

World > Quest Progression

6/30/13 2:25:15 AM#10
Originally posted by pfcgriff

From what I've seen, F2P does make more money on less people. I'm not saying a F2P game with 5m players would make less money than P2P. There is a number where the number of players has reach to break even between F2P and P2P.

IE. Less than 500k the game would be better off F2P than P2P, but over that its more a question of what the Dev wants to do. Wow has an item shop, while very limited and silly expensive it is there. And the money they made from the like 5 mounts they have on there likely would buy them a very nice castle on a hill somewhere. 

The freemium model of  EQ2 is the only one that bothers me. A vast majority of the new art assets for armor and weapons are on the marketplace instead of being available VIA in game means. This is the only thing that worries me about EQN is that it will be a freemium model like EQ2 and have a cash shop where all the decent looking stuff ends up. 

So your sub may get you bonus xp or no queue time but the cool looking gear is all on the item shop. Sony has actually shown this plan with PS2 actaully, with the only difference between a Sub and a Free is bonus xp and no server queues.

 

They have talked about putting cosmetics in the game as recipes, not sure if they have actually done it though.  My worry for EQN is that there will be no sub option... at which point SoE could pull what NC pulls where you get changed more than a sub to enjoy the game.  I was also bothered by the cosmetic cost even with a sub with EQ2.  It's been topped by the RNG lock boxes and reagent needs of other MMOs.

  DamonVile

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/22/05
Posts: 4909

6/30/13 2:25:43 AM#11

I wouldn't say it's even just the bad ones. It's the mediocre ones that can't stay a float as p2p. These games that can't keep people playing for more than a month or two at a time don't really keep people longer as f2p. they just don't have the pay barrier that kept people from playing when they were p2p.

They still have the same turn over but they get way more people trying it. Way more people spending small amounts and people come and go and come back more often.

A good game keeps it's players, it doesn't matter what it's pay model is. f2p does however have the ability to earn more per month from a player than p2p does.

  Robokapp

Hard Core Member

Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 4819

The only luck I had today was to have you as my opponent.

6/30/13 2:50:51 AM#12
Originally posted by Fendel84M
Originally posted by Robokapp

wow isn't. eve isn't.

 

it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.

So in your opinion, WoW and Eve are the only two good P2P MMOs ever made? And since you hate all F2P MMOs... is it your opinion that WoW and Eve are the only two good MMOs ever made, period?

no, in my opinion wow and eve are some good mmo's. you asked why all are going f2p, i gave you two examples that aren't.

 

I don't hate f2p mmo's, just the cash shops. I play a f2p mmo in my eve browser while mining. I think they're great temporary distractions, much like addictinggames.com games are - which are also f2p but without the cash shop. yet not MMOs.

 

so in your opinion, are all p2p mmo's going f2p like your title says ?

 

 

  wordiz

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/13/12
Posts: 481

6/30/13 2:52:39 AM#13
Because they don't make more money. 

http://thewordiz.wordpress.com/

  azzamasin

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2832

We live in a fantasy world, a world of illusion. The great task in life is to find reality.

6/30/13 2:53:39 AM#14
Originally posted by Fendel84M

I'm not against P2P and I'm not against F2P I like all models(to some extent).

But I hear it tossed around a lot, that P2P games make more money and get more updates and are hence better. If this is true, why are almost all the P2P games going F2P? Do they just hate money?

Even Rift, which was every P2P die hard's anthem. "Look at Rift! That game pumps out so much content because it is P2P!" well...they went F2P. Were they tired of making all that money?

Other than WoW, Eve is one of the only hold outs with a sub. But even that game allows players to basically buy in game currency through the plex system. (buy tons of plex and sell it all in game) so it's not a pure P2P game with everyone equal regardless of money spent.

I am just curious what the reasoning here is. The P2P games are better, because they make more money, yet they all have to go F2P. Something feels off...

 Theres only 1, maybe 2 P2P games that make more money then if they go F2P.  Wow and Eve.  The market share is not large enough to support so many P2P games.  Just like in in 1999 when only 3 major games were P2P, the same holds true today in 2013.

If your idea of a Sandbox is open FFA Full Loot PvP, full crafted world with minimal support for anything combat then your sandbox ideas are bad! Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

  fyerwall

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/01/04
Posts: 3204

6/30/13 3:00:56 AM#15
Originally posted by Fendel84M

Personally, I just think there are too many MMOs and not enough players to sustain most games. MMOs are so different from every other genre, the games are made and then new ones come out but the only ones don't go away. The old MMOs are still trying to keep their players faithful to them, and the new ones are trying to lure them away.

I think back to the old days and how people were more committed to their MMOs but were we really? Or was it just a lack of choice?

I recall playing Meridian 59 with my brothers, and we were hardcore about that game. We loved it to death and had no intentions of quitting. But then EverQuest was coming out, we read the articles and saw the screenshots. So we hopped on board the EverQuest mobile! Then I believe it was another couple years or so until Asherons Call came out and my brothers and I decided to try that, and then Anarchy Online etc etc.

I think WoW and EverQuest 2 were the last two MMOs I actually spent more than a year on respectively.

The point of all this rambling, is back then MMOs took a long time to come out. We didn't have a new game every few months to try out and convert to. I think about the last year or so and I've had GW2, TSW, Defiance, Dragon's Prophet, Neverwinter, Marvel Heroes, and FFXIV beta all installed on my computer and launched/beta'd to different degrees. That's more MMOs than my first TEN years of MMO playing combined!

Well back then each game was built differently than the next. Sure, some of the basics were the same, but DAoC went with RvR, AO was sci-fi with a unique character build system (also the first use of instances and flying mounts), AC was more sandbox type progression than the others, etc.

Then WoW came out. It was new, it was a bit more polished at launch than any of the other games that came before it and it was made by a company that was known for quality games (at one point). It grabbed almost the entire genre. It pulled in players who may have never touched an MMO otherwise. 

And then it started.

MMOs began popping up everywhere, Imports from the east, Movie IPs, etc. Everyone saw WoW and said "We can do that too!"

Players began bouncing around from game to game. New MMOs would launch with a million box sales and finish out the month with less than 200k subscribers. No one wanted to pay for a game they were pretty much already playing, or the games launched in such a disastrous fashion it just scared people away. Players were scattering out across an expanding ocean of new games, thinning the populations of already existing games. It became harder for developers to keep people subbed.

So you are pretty much correct in the 'too much supply, not enough demand' area. But it goes a bit deeper in that a lot of the supply fell short on bringing anything new or worthy to the genre. 

Also, I do want to apologize in advance. If this seems a bit all over the place it's due to the fact I am riding a pretty big sugar high atm. The girlfriend is trying a ton of different frosting recipes for a family event and I am the default taste tester. I may just end up in a diabetic coma by sunrise today...

There are 3 types of people in the world.
1.) Those who make things happen
2.) Those who watch things happen
3.) And those who wonder "What the %#*& just happened?!"


  Heretique

Advanced Member

Joined: 2/02/07
Posts: 1006

Most of my posts get deleted.

6/30/13 3:06:56 AM#16
Games aren't about the games anymore, it's about how much you can make off of it. F2P offers more to the company than a sub can.

Originally posted by salsa41
are you have problem ?

  Matticus75

Novice Member

Joined: 10/18/05
Posts: 393

6/30/13 3:13:50 AM#17

P2P games can make the most money, but you make more if you make a cheap level game like farmville, advertise it as full P2P game, then reduce it to what it is (a low budget F2P) then you make more money add the cost to make the cheap game in itself

 

More like ask yourself this, make a farmville F2P with a low budget of lets say $50,000 and make $150,000 off it, Or make a $50 million P2P and make $150 mil off it.

Alot easier and less risky to make a farmville than to make a WoW

And where is the market going?  its not going to put the millions to make lets say SWTOR right the first time, why instead you can make a low budget game that is compatable for your cell phone, tablet, and low end laptop, make it F2P and make a little cash with lower risk, as opposesd to alot cash P2P with a high risk, high budget game.

Im afraid after all the milltions spent on SWTOR, nobody is going to invest on a large budget game in a long time

Gold spammers and Farmville in a round bout way runied gaming for now, suprised that businesses did jump on the F2P garbage concept years eariler.

  Lobotomist

Hard Core Member

Joined: 5/20/07
Posts: 4884

I got so much trouble on my mind Refuse to lose.

6/30/13 3:17:57 AM#18

Several reasons:

1. P2P model is outdated. - You can not charge subscription for a similar game that competitors give for free(ish). This is simple rule of market.

2. Subscription makes more money if you have enough subscribers. - Simply there is profit line where P2P game makes less money than F2P

---

Said that. I dont think F2P is here to stay either.

I think market is moving towards B2P as model that makes more logic both for player and publisher.

 

  tawess

Elite Member

Joined: 3/24/05
Posts: 2122

6/30/13 3:27:40 AM#19
Originally posted by Lobotomist

Several reasons:

1. P2P model is outdated. - You can not charge subscription for a similar game that competitors give for free(ish). This is simple rule of market.

2. Subscription makes more money if you have enough subscribers. - Simply there is profit line where P2P game makes less money than F2P

---

Said that. I dont think F2P is here to stay either.

I think market is moving towards B2P as model that makes more logic both for player and publisher.

 

 

Well even if they do they will still have a cash-shop, that is simply to good of a way to get money for them to pass up. I think that the current F2P model will stay around for a good amount of time actually and become more and more common. Maybe even to the point of moving in to single player games.

Tomas Soapbox

This have been a good conversation

  Dreamo84

Defender of Worlds

Joined: 5/20/04
Posts: 3179

I actually still like MMORPGs

 
OP  6/30/13 3:31:17 AM#20
Originally posted by Robokapp
Originally posted by Fendel84M
Originally posted by Robokapp

wow isn't. eve isn't.

 

it's the bad p2p games that go f2p. not all of them.

So in your opinion, WoW and Eve are the only two good P2P MMOs ever made? And since you hate all F2P MMOs... is it your opinion that WoW and Eve are the only two good MMOs ever made, period?

no, in my opinion wow and eve are some good mmo's. you asked why all are going f2p, i gave you two examples that aren't.

 

I don't hate f2p mmo's, just the cash shops. I play a f2p mmo in my eve browser while mining. I think they're great temporary distractions, much like addictinggames.com games are - which are also f2p but without the cash shop. yet not MMOs.

 

so in your opinion, are all p2p mmo's going f2p like your title says ?

 

 

You said the bad P2P games go F2P, the only P2P games that haven't gone F2P(I believe) are FFXI, WoW, and Eve. Oh! And Ultima Online. So that's 4 that I can think of. Based on your statement every other P2P game was bad, so it went F2P.

And it's not really a matter of opinion. It does seem like all P2P games are going F2P. I'm still on the fence about F2P, I think some games have taken things a bit too far with their cash shops.

10 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search