Trending Games | The Crew | Landmark | Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor | WildStar

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,850,358 Users Online:0
Games:732  Posts:6,223,679
Zenimax Online Studios | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 04/04/14)  | Pub:Bethesda Softworks
Distribution: | Retail Price:$59.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info? Let us know!

3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search
45 posts found
  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3778

8/25/13 2:07:31 PM#41
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin

It's not a matter of trust or faith. Just pointing out that someone else who spends a lot of time watching the MMO world. thinks like I do: B2P is a F2P variant with differences that are hardly worth emphasizing.

As to developers... my son is also a developer. He comes to me for advice about MMOs. Developing is just a job-- a nice one, but that's all it is. No guarantee that they're any more knowledgeable about the ins and outs of MMOs than anyone else.

I take opinions at face value... credentials don't impress me a whole bunch.

Ya, well I would think most people would take others opinions at face value. Even when someone has credentials and opinion is still only an opinion. However, when you start looking at statistics, is when you really should not take it as face value. Basically if someone states an opinion, but has some proof to back it up, is when a person should start considering that this person might be right.

 

Statistics...that I would love to see and discuss. Especially with all the people in this and similar threads who assume P2P is a greedy cash grab decision. 

The MMO revenue statistics I have seen published all indicate that there is more money being spent on F2P MMOs than P2P... like this report for example: http://www.newzoo.com/press-releases/free-to-play-mmo-game-spending-increases-24-to-1-2bn-dollar-in-u-s/

And that was based off 2011 numbers.

Then there's this statistic: The free-to-play model has driven Tera’s revenues up three-fold compared to its subscription era http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/20/tera-mmo-has-more-subscribers-as-a-free-to-play-game-than-when-it-required-a-subscription/

And this one: Since Star Wars: The Old Republic added a free-to-play option in November, monthly average revenue has doubled http://www.gamespot.com/news/the-old-republic-monthly-revenue-has-doubled-since-free-to-play-switch-6408053

I know, I know...companies play games with reports of MMO revenues and the F2P transition of an already declining game gives it a temporary boost. Still, there are all kinds of reports that seem to indicate that if maximizing profits is what you want, F2P is the way to go - not P2P. I'm sure $OE has done its market research and are going that route with EQN for the usual $OE reasons.

Matt Firor stated that the main reason for their decision to go P2P is immersion. Now, most opinionated cynical "experts" on Reddit dismiss that as propaganda... but just stop and think for a second, which is more immerssive, an in-game cash shop or the lack of one?

Why do we hate gold selling spammers in games? It's their half-assed marketing spam that fills up the chat and our mailbox... but F2P games all have official company spam... other than better English, how is it different from a spam and annoyance point of view?

So...bring on whatever statistics you have. Let's see if you can convince me that a) F2P is not more profitable and b) the in-game marketing is not annoying.

  Brabbit1987

Elite Member

Joined: 10/02/11
Posts: 664

8/25/13 3:15:58 PM#42
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin

It's not a matter of trust or faith. Just pointing out that someone else who spends a lot of time watching the MMO world. thinks like I do: B2P is a F2P variant with differences that are hardly worth emphasizing.

As to developers... my son is also a developer. He comes to me for advice about MMOs. Developing is just a job-- a nice one, but that's all it is. No guarantee that they're any more knowledgeable about the ins and outs of MMOs than anyone else.

I take opinions at face value... credentials don't impress me a whole bunch.

Ya, well I would think most people would take others opinions at face value. Even when someone has credentials and opinion is still only an opinion. However, when you start looking at statistics, is when you really should not take it as face value. Basically if someone states an opinion, but has some proof to back it up, is when a person should start considering that this person might be right.

 

Statistics...that I would love to see and discuss. Especially with all the people in this and similar threads who assume P2P is a greedy cash grab decision. 

The MMO revenue statistics I have seen published all indicate that there is more money being spent on F2P MMOs than P2P... like this report for example: http://www.newzoo.com/press-releases/free-to-play-mmo-game-spending-increases-24-to-1-2bn-dollar-in-u-s/

And that was based off 2011 numbers.

Then there's this statistic: The free-to-play model has driven Tera’s revenues up three-fold compared to its subscription era http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/20/tera-mmo-has-more-subscribers-as-a-free-to-play-game-than-when-it-required-a-subscription/

And this one: Since Star Wars: The Old Republic added a free-to-play option in November, monthly average revenue has doubled http://www.gamespot.com/news/the-old-republic-monthly-revenue-has-doubled-since-free-to-play-switch-6408053

I know, I know...companies play games with reports of MMO revenues and the F2P transition of an already declining game gives it a temporary boost. Still, there are all kinds of reports that seem to indicate that if maximizing profits is what you want, F2P is the way to go - not P2P. I'm sure $OE has done its market research and are going that route with EQN for the usual $OE reasons.

Matt Firor stated that the main reason for their decision to go P2P is immersion. Now, most opinionated cynical "experts" on Reddit dismiss that as propaganda... but just stop and think for a second, which is more immerssive, an in-game cash shop or the lack of one?

Why do we hate gold selling spammers in games? It's their half-assed marketing spam that fills up the chat and our mailbox... but F2P games all have official company spam... other than better English, how is it different from a spam and annoyance point of view?

So...bring on whatever statistics you have. Let's see if you can convince me that a) F2P is not more profitable and b) the in-game marketing is not annoying.

Actually, no, I agree with those statistics and never said I didn't lol.

F2P most certainly does earn a company more money. Heck, I think for the most part B2P would earn them more money as well. Which is why I think it's crazy they decided on P2P.

That has been my whole argument the entire time.

My other argument is that P2P is dead. The model sucks. You want a P2P game, but that model causes the game to go F2P eventually, so it defeats the entire purpose in my opinion.

The truth of the matter is, a newer model needs to be developed.

However, for the time being, I think the B2P model works and prevents the game ever going entirely F2P.

  Iselin

The Listener

Joined: 3/04/08
Posts: 3778

8/25/13 4:05:16 PM#43
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin

It's not a matter of trust or faith. Just pointing out that someone else who spends a lot of time watching the MMO world. thinks like I do: B2P is a F2P variant with differences that are hardly worth emphasizing.

As to developers... my son is also a developer. He comes to me for advice about MMOs. Developing is just a job-- a nice one, but that's all it is. No guarantee that they're any more knowledgeable about the ins and outs of MMOs than anyone else.

I take opinions at face value... credentials don't impress me a whole bunch.

Ya, well I would think most people would take others opinions at face value. Even when someone has credentials and opinion is still only an opinion. However, when you start looking at statistics, is when you really should not take it as face value. Basically if someone states an opinion, but has some proof to back it up, is when a person should start considering that this person might be right.

 

Statistics...that I would love to see and discuss. Especially with all the people in this and similar threads who assume P2P is a greedy cash grab decision. 

The MMO revenue statistics I have seen published all indicate that there is more money being spent on F2P MMOs than P2P... like this report for example: http://www.newzoo.com/press-releases/free-to-play-mmo-game-spending-increases-24-to-1-2bn-dollar-in-u-s/

And that was based off 2011 numbers.

Then there's this statistic: The free-to-play model has driven Tera’s revenues up three-fold compared to its subscription era http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/20/tera-mmo-has-more-subscribers-as-a-free-to-play-game-than-when-it-required-a-subscription/

And this one: Since Star Wars: The Old Republic added a free-to-play option in November, monthly average revenue has doubled http://www.gamespot.com/news/the-old-republic-monthly-revenue-has-doubled-since-free-to-play-switch-6408053

I know, I know...companies play games with reports of MMO revenues and the F2P transition of an already declining game gives it a temporary boost. Still, there are all kinds of reports that seem to indicate that if maximizing profits is what you want, F2P is the way to go - not P2P. I'm sure $OE has done its market research and are going that route with EQN for the usual $OE reasons.

Matt Firor stated that the main reason for their decision to go P2P is immersion. Now, most opinionated cynical "experts" on Reddit dismiss that as propaganda... but just stop and think for a second, which is more immerssive, an in-game cash shop or the lack of one?

Why do we hate gold selling spammers in games? It's their half-assed marketing spam that fills up the chat and our mailbox... but F2P games all have official company spam... other than better English, how is it different from a spam and annoyance point of view?

So...bring on whatever statistics you have. Let's see if you can convince me that a) F2P is not more profitable and b) the in-game marketing is not annoying.

Actually, no, I agree with those statistics and never said I didn't lol.

F2P most certainly does earn a company more money. Heck, I think for the most part B2P would earn them more money as well. Which is why I think it's crazy they decided on P2P.

That has been my whole argument the entire time.

My other argument is that P2P is dead. The model sucks. You want a P2P game, but that model causes the game to go F2P eventually, so it defeats the entire purpose in my opinion.

The truth of the matter is, a newer model needs to be developed.

However, for the time being, I think the B2P model works and prevents the game ever going entirely F2P.

I know you haven't but "greedy cash grab" is the most common anti-P2P comment I see.

And to be honest, Wilodstar and ESO going the P2P route was also a surprise to me. I've seen the same trends and was fully expecting all 3, EQN, ESO and Wildstar to be B2P..the trend seemed inevitable.

But I'm actually glad they went this way and will stay this way for at least a couple of years--Rift, a good but predictable WOW clone lasted more than 2 years before making the switch - I can't see ESO transitioning faster unless it really sucks.

I just do not like to be marketed and sold at in subtle and not so subtle ways inside the game... hate it as a matter of fact. And I know, not all B2P or F2P games are equally blatant or have outrageous prices like Neverwinter does. But the little reminders are unavoidable even if rare.

Everything in the real world is "buy me!", "you need me!" who needs that crap in a fantasy game world?

  Brabbit1987

Elite Member

Joined: 10/02/11
Posts: 664

8/25/13 4:50:29 PM#44
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin
Originally posted by Brabbit1987
Originally posted by Iselin

It's not a matter of trust or faith. Just pointing out that someone else who spends a lot of time watching the MMO world. thinks like I do: B2P is a F2P variant with differences that are hardly worth emphasizing.

As to developers... my son is also a developer. He comes to me for advice about MMOs. Developing is just a job-- a nice one, but that's all it is. No guarantee that they're any more knowledgeable about the ins and outs of MMOs than anyone else.

I take opinions at face value... credentials don't impress me a whole bunch.

Ya, well I would think most people would take others opinions at face value. Even when someone has credentials and opinion is still only an opinion. However, when you start looking at statistics, is when you really should not take it as face value. Basically if someone states an opinion, but has some proof to back it up, is when a person should start considering that this person might be right.

 

Statistics...that I would love to see and discuss. Especially with all the people in this and similar threads who assume P2P is a greedy cash grab decision. 

The MMO revenue statistics I have seen published all indicate that there is more money being spent on F2P MMOs than P2P... like this report for example: http://www.newzoo.com/press-releases/free-to-play-mmo-game-spending-increases-24-to-1-2bn-dollar-in-u-s/

And that was based off 2011 numbers.

Then there's this statistic: The free-to-play model has driven Tera’s revenues up three-fold compared to its subscription era http://venturebeat.com/2013/03/20/tera-mmo-has-more-subscribers-as-a-free-to-play-game-than-when-it-required-a-subscription/

And this one: Since Star Wars: The Old Republic added a free-to-play option in November, monthly average revenue has doubled http://www.gamespot.com/news/the-old-republic-monthly-revenue-has-doubled-since-free-to-play-switch-6408053

I know, I know...companies play games with reports of MMO revenues and the F2P transition of an already declining game gives it a temporary boost. Still, there are all kinds of reports that seem to indicate that if maximizing profits is what you want, F2P is the way to go - not P2P. I'm sure $OE has done its market research and are going that route with EQN for the usual $OE reasons.

Matt Firor stated that the main reason for their decision to go P2P is immersion. Now, most opinionated cynical "experts" on Reddit dismiss that as propaganda... but just stop and think for a second, which is more immerssive, an in-game cash shop or the lack of one?

Why do we hate gold selling spammers in games? It's their half-assed marketing spam that fills up the chat and our mailbox... but F2P games all have official company spam... other than better English, how is it different from a spam and annoyance point of view?

So...bring on whatever statistics you have. Let's see if you can convince me that a) F2P is not more profitable and b) the in-game marketing is not annoying.

Actually, no, I agree with those statistics and never said I didn't lol.

F2P most certainly does earn a company more money. Heck, I think for the most part B2P would earn them more money as well. Which is why I think it's crazy they decided on P2P.

That has been my whole argument the entire time.

My other argument is that P2P is dead. The model sucks. You want a P2P game, but that model causes the game to go F2P eventually, so it defeats the entire purpose in my opinion.

The truth of the matter is, a newer model needs to be developed.

However, for the time being, I think the B2P model works and prevents the game ever going entirely F2P.

I know you haven't but "greedy cash grab" is the most common anti-P2P comment I see.

And to be honest, Wilodstar and ESO going the P2P route was also a surprise to me. I've seen the same trends and was fully expecting all 3, EQN, ESO and Wildstar to be B2P..the trend seemed inevitable.

But I'm actually glad they went this way and will stay this way for at least a couple of years--Rift, a good but predictable WOW clone lasted more than 2 years before making the switch - I can't see ESO transitioning faster unless it really sucks.

I just do not like to be marketed and sold at in subtle and not so subtle ways inside the game... hate it as a matter of fact. And I know, not all B2P or F2P games are equally blatant or have outrageous prices like Neverwinter does. But the little reminders are unavoidable even if rare.

Everything in the real world is "buy me!", "you need me!" who needs that crap in a fantasy game world?

ehhh ... I am going to be honest. I personally don't see it lasting over a year. I think it will go F2P by the end of 2014.

  User Deleted
8/30/13 3:12:47 PM#45
We have all seen this before. It has become the common business model for new release MMORPGs. They all release with a box / download fee, a cash shop, and an associated subscription fee to cash in for as much upfront money as they can garner during the initial launch phase when the hype is strong and everyone and their brother is trying out the game. Then, when the herd plays through and moves on to the next big game soon to release on their interest list in three months the game goes either free to play or buy to play with a yet greedier cash shop to stay relevant while most of the original design team is fired or move on to another internal project. We don't need to call Jesse Venture hare guys its all in the open and has happened before with every game we talk about on these forums released over the past few years.
3 Pages « 1 2 3 Search