Richard Aihoshi's Free Zone: F2P Spreads West
The trend of free-to-play, microtransaction supported MMOs is coming West. Aihoshi looks at the trend in this week's column.
A couple of weeks ago, Turbine made the rather intriguing announcement that it will enter the free to play market this summer with Dungeons & Dragons Online: Eberron Unlimited, which is referred to as a digital upgrade to its 2006 subscription title. The press release didn't really say anything as to when or why this came about, and I've seen nothing in this regard since. As a result, I can only speculate the seemingly obvious, that the company feels the game has more potential to move forward with a change of business model.
One thing I find interesting is that SOE took the same step quite recently with the launch of Free Realms. However, it was developed from the ground up, which means the decision to do so was made some time ago. I have no way of knowing whether this factored into Turbine's thinking or if the timing was purely coincidental. What's very clear, however, is that F2P is continuing to gain prominence within the western market.
And let's not forget that neither was first major subscription MMOG publisher in this hemisphere to make a move in this direction. Just off the top of my head, Funcom shifted Anarchy Online over a few years ago, and NCsoft released Dungeon Runners in the second quarter of 2007. I can't help but wonder how long it will be before more of the other major players in the industry opt to join them.
EA is a pretty interesting candidate. The movers and shakers there can't be happy about Activision Blizzard's dominant market position. WAR was never a serious candidate to challenge WoW, and almost certainly hasn't performed up to expectations. SWTOR likely has more potential, largely due to the tremendous popularity of its underlying property, but would you actually bet on it taking over the market leadership position?
If we assume that the likelihood of winning the battle for the online space with a heads-on approach is questionable, then what's the alternative? Yes, an indirect one. And what's the most attractive possibility? Sure, going the F2P route won't win the war in terms of subscriber numbers. But that's not what the bean counters count. Revenue and especially profit are what matter to them.
Microsoft also crossed my mind. How long can the software giant ignore the large and rapidly growing revenue stream that is online gaming, including subscription, F2P any other business models? While it's not the market leader, EA at least has a significant presence in the sector. But not Big Brother, which has a history marked by various missteps and false starts. Will Bill and his boys be content to watch from outside, saying they gave it a try and failed? And do they think it was their best shot?
Also, what about Blizzard? It's tempting to regard it as the last publisher that would consider F2P. After all, why tamper with the subscription formula when it's so lucrative? Well, there's at least a possible answer in that half of WoW's subscribers actually aren't, not in the sense of paying a flat monthly fee. I'm talking about the ones in China, who buy bundles of hours, which they can then use when they please.
In addition, the company has seen the power of F2P to drive significant user numbers there. The last comparative figures I recall seeing were prior to Lich King. At that time, WoW had something like 800,000 peak concurrent users. It trailed a game called Zhengtu Online as well as the market leader, Fantasy Westward Journey, which was well ahead with something in the area of 1.5 million. PCU doesn't directly correlate with profitability. However, the more players you have, the greater the potential to monetize them, which isn't limited to virtual item purchases.
In that particular topic area, it seems worth noting that DDO Unlimited isn't completely F2P with the "standard" item mall. Instead, it uses a hybrid revenue scheme where some of the content is deemed premium, and is only available to those who pay to play. The available specifics are rather limited. The official website tells us "Free content is widely available for low-level characters and becomes sparser as a character's level increases." It also says free players will have to pay if they wish to unlock certain classes such as the Monk, or to gain access to the Warforged and Drow races.
As I've mentioned in my recent column on trends I'm tracking, I expect we'll see more games offering payment schemes aside from straight subscription or item sales. Sometimes, I even wonder about both together. Wouldn't that be interesting?
More The Free Zone Features:
More Columns:
More Features:
He is the former Editor of RPG Vault and his column, focusing on free to play MMOs, appears on MMORPG.com every Monday.
As a Western gamer, no it wouldn't be interesting. The whole item mall sham is a dagger to my heart. Just nickel and dime us to death; sell content once you're hooked like a drug dealer; offer unfair advantages by way of items and gear in PvP games. It all just sucks.
I have no problem paying a subscription fee, or several fees. There is real value to your entertainment dollar in 15 or even 30 dollars a month. But once you start letting people buy there way to the top, with no effort, you enter a zone of cheating and exploit that I want no part of. It is just greed, and it is creeping towards NA and EU like a virus.
Actually the danger of going to a f2p model is adding a lot of short term players. The f2p game doesn't attract the long term players, hence it is a revenue model based on continually attracting new players which means the first time a newer MMO shows up you have significant playerbase loss. Rather a dangerous way to gain revenue.
There will always be subscription games because there are a significant portion of the market that won't play with players who can buy their way to the top.
The short term players contribute to the retention of the long term players. The long term ones are usually the ones that are paying. F2P effectively and greatly reduces the chance of people leaving because of a 'dead' server.
Apart from Free realms, all the other games mentioned were one step before closure. F2P was the last ditch effort to bring life to these games that they quality alone could not support them in the competitive P2P market. If nothing else, it reinforces the argument that F2P games are of lower quality compared to the P2P ones. As for Free realms, it'll be interesting to see some financial results once the novelty of being new wears off.
What the market is lacking is more diversity of quality products. Unfortunately F2P does not promote quality, but an excuse to "sell" an inferior product. After all, it's "free", right?
Edit: Another game that was not mentioned and went F2P due to low quality is Archlord from Codemasters.
I can't help but think of the Arcade Era when I read your post.
One of the unavoidable truths of arcade games is that they were designed to kill the player quickly, as that meant more quarters for vendors. As a result, arcade games needed to remain simplistic in order to keep plays short and revenues high.
http://www.ubyssey.ca/?p=7940
Sure, it almost seems like a negative thing... but when I examine western gaming history... I almost saw the F2P market as inevitable.
Though I can't really explain why or how... it just feels like this is and was bound to happen since the dawn of MMO's.
Perhaps... an endless cycle that merely changes the forms that it appears. The F2P shopping-market will likely become a dominant form of online entertainment until it is time for it to change again.
As gamers’ tastes grew sophisticated, interest in arcade games dwindled and most large-format gaming centres closed down. Cabinets started disappearing from donut shops and grocery stores.
Give it time, eventually it will change back.... right now this is what the market wants it seems. Maybe 4-6 years?
or perhaps developers need a new way to develop games that drastically cuts down on costs so that they don't have to go to these methods.
I disagree that players can buy their way the top in all F2P games. This is spewed on forums a lot, but is is simply not true. I currently play Atlantica Online and Runes of Magic and in both of those games, it is not possible to buy your way to the top. It is mostly mounts and vanity items. You really should check out some of the higher quality F2P games before you make blanket statements. I personally play several F2P games as well as a subscription game. It does not matter to me what business model they use. Get over it and just play a game that is fun.
Be consoled in learning that that will not work for an Item Mall MMO. The 70-80% of the playerbase that plays for free is needed to keep the game going. To try to nickel and dime the entire playerbase removes that 70-80% which effectively causes the remaining players, the ones monetizing the game, to leave.
I would advice Richard Aihoshi to study F2P market model and the players those company's aim for.
Its the Long term adicted player they wana draw in, not the short term freebee player. they dont give a crap about those.
The longterm adicted guy/girl player they can SELL item to. like big time marketers and fast talking salesman they will try to convince you that new mount is ultra cool and super luxe and you Must buy it or your soo avarage.
For those peopel strong enoug to resiste the F2P model is fine I guess, most people are not that strong. Infact on avarage we are extremely weak when it comes to resisting getting new stuff.
There aint a Financial crisis for nothing. people want thing, get loans cource its sooo cheap and tempting and poof....
F2P is here to stay , but its not a good thing. its making a honest fair market into a grap all you can sales market .
I disagree with Richards analysis. All I see in the Western market are failed games on life support turning to F2P as a last roll of the dice. I admit Free Realms is an anomoly in this area, but then the game is really designed for kids and would probably not suite a subscription model.
I admit I'm not a fan of F2P, I would be more than happy if this system stayed in the East and never reared its ugly head in the West again. I've no idea why I feel that way, a part of it is that I'm just used to Sub based system, I like to know where I stand with a game and that if I pay the set fee I will have access to everything I need in the game, the strange thing is that it isn't about the amount of money for me, I'd be happy to pay a higher sub if the game is worth it. I think the other thing is the association of F2P=Crap game. Seriously, when we get the first AAA title in the West that is F2P then I'll start getting worried, for now it just remains the indicator of failing games imho.
Quote from Richard Aihoshi:
As I've mentioned in my recent column on trends I'm tracking, I expect we'll see more games offering payment schemes aside from straight subscription or item sales. Sometimes, I even wonder about both together. Wouldn't that be interesting?
oh god no, it's already been tried, EQ2 is a sub game with item mall and it sucks, instantly cancelled my Station Access account as a direct result. It's one or the other, and that means sub based unless your game is a failure.
Interesting? No, at least for everyone who thinks $15 for a potential whole month of fun is a fair price for being equally competitive and don't want to face games in which $100 a month might not even be close enough to become competitive. China's Pay For Hours format is the definite win for casual players, you should be focusing on this instead of the F2P model that is highly appealing for the developers, not for the players.
Inevitable? Maybe, people are getting used to accepting that getting completely "owned" by someone who spends $1000 a month is better than someone who spends 15 hours a day. For the companies, that is a great way to think, money = win.
Mark my words, DDO will get a growingly abusive item mall, it gets much worse when you need to pay a monthly fee for content AND have an item mall to trash money with. It has happened with every F2P game after its initial hype when patches that stack on providing item mall content.
First Richard forgot something about DDO unlimited..Turbine is making it possible for players to earn points in game to pay for the premium content like races, classes and adventures. Second, I hope this trend gets more popular. It is no secret that our economy is in shambles and alot of people cannot afford to play the games they used to pay for, or want to start. 15 dollars a month is alot for people watching their budgets. If the Big Game companies can make like Turbine and give the free players a chance to earn points, ingame, to spend on stuff that others pay with cash then a huge bravo to them. It show that the companies understand the economy and can still make money from those who are working and have the money while helping the ones who don't/can't. May the trend pick up...I applaud them all for doing so.
I'm sorry even though this is off-topic i felt the need to comment on this. I didn't play Runes of Magic but i did play Atlantica Online and to me it felt like you could buy your way to the top with the item mall(I honestly don't see how you don't).
You have:
-Scrolls that can kill a whole group of monsters(experience is added to the character that uses the scroll)
-teleport licences that allows you to move between areas much faster than other players(a much faster way to finish quests since you dont waste time walking)
-power up items that give you 50% more experience and damage(and some defense)
-enhance stones that allow you to upgrade your armors w/o the risk of losing them
And i could go on. I'm not saying that the game is unplayable but there is still the possibility of buying your way to the top. However most people that say that "in f2p games you can buy your way to the top" are also ignoring the fact that if someone wishes to they can buy a max level character from "bot farmers" or "players that quit". It's not like the people on this forums haven't heard of RMT.
Now back on topic i agree with Senadina, that f2p in a way condone and actually promote cheating(or at least it creates the community for it). I have seen EULA's that say "we do not allow RMT" but they do allow the trade of item mall items for in-game currency between players(which is actually the same thing except the money goes through the game publisher/developer instead of directly to a player).
Can you cite which MMOs you are referring to?
I'm also interested in whether you think those are the exception or the norm with item mall MMOs.
Sorry D&D was DOA.. And struggled ever since it was released. They went with a partial micro transaction to open classes and parts of the game, yet retained its monthly fee and have the whole game to open the door to populate its servers.
Its not the same, nor should be chucked in with the payed advertisments that have all but taken over mmorpg.com.
North American gamers want a lvl playing field, we are a subscription customer base. Hence when these asian item mall games show up they disappear from radar just as fast. The content offered has always been a generation or three behind the NA developed games.
If we NA players do play those titles we dont spend money on them.
As of late the asian developers have been trying to turn our biggest pc gaming market into a item mall game, The fps market.
EA tried to experiment with the idea with battlefield heros, and as its been going, The models not profitable, so they are practically giving the items away, They lowered the prices on everything to next to nothing and made them perminant. Thus they are trying to just make thier money back for the development. The last ditch effort.
Why spend cash on a game i can out right buy and play , mod, etc... And a few download for free for ever and have the whole game forever.
So no matter how Richard tries to spin the free to play model, the facts are the facts. And we have choosen with our wallets.
The guys like a used car salesman, trying to convince me that ol car with 200,000 old lady miles is the biggest and best thing since carryout.
Why would i want that ol car when i own a mustang...
It may not be the best solution but I think this is the trend for the future here in the west. I know players now that are quitting thier games because of lack of money. F2P is an answer so they can continue in thier favorite games. Even Bliz may have to consider it.
I've tried both of those games, so don't assume about my gaming history. The reason I do not play them now has nothing to do with item malls and everything to do with the fact that they are not AAA titles, but inferior F2P games. Yes, inferior. They do not have the polish of a AAA P2P game.
But now, developers with money are adopting this F2P item mall crap, and it incenses me. Sony, Turbine, and other big developers are hopping on this crapwagon.
And while I cannot, of course, claim that EVERY game with an item mall is selling PvP advantages, I know for a fact some DO. Which goes back to my point about RMT being a creeping infection that will consume everything in it's path eventually.
I think F2P is a viable option..god knows why NCsoft isn't doing this with Aion as it would make that game a major contender, but I can promise you that EQ and EQ II will be F2p by 2010. Right now my game dujour is perfect World I am in a aweosme close knight guild I spend about five bucks a month and work for the rest of my loot. IF NCsoft would go F2P with Aion I would be there in a heartbeat.
Can you cite which MMOs you are referring to?
I'm also interested in whether you think those are the exception or the norm with item mall MMOs.
Right off the top of my head...Conquer Online springs to mind. In order to have a ton of +5 or higher enhanced dual-slotted gear with the best gems, you could spend months farming things with a 1/100 drop rate to make said upgrades, realizing that each upgrade has a less chance than the last to work (until you're looking at 1/100 chance of the upgrade going through, so we're talking 10,000 or more kills for a success)....or you could spend a ton of rl money now and have it in a day. And since all the best players are geared like that...to keep up you have to be too.
Gunbound also springs to mind, though not an RPG...the best gear comes from the item malls, and makes a HUGE difference in stats.
Many (not all, but many) Item-mall based MMOs sell items who create a VERY defined edge in player power. Those with a credit card to burn stay well ahead of those who have not.
I agree 100%.
I agree 100%.
I understand it's a better monetary model for developers than a subscription base, but it still caters to people with more money than brains.
I really hope Blizzard's new project isn't a microtransaction game...
Great post. I highlighted a very important sentence that definitely deserved it.
Rmt, Item mall style F2P games never land on my harddrive.
Its the most disgusting form of gaming yet.
There was a time when companies had more pride in themselves on good products that could hold the attention of their targeted audience . Just doesn't seem to be the case anymore. Every game I recently have been looking at with the exception of a few notables seems to have some form of RMT/ implemented. Its enuf to make people like myself cancel subs immediately and never renew. Make me sick.
DDO was the only game I've ever cancelled a credit card to get out of a pre-order for. It was horrible.
Great post. I highlighted a very important sentence that definitely deserved it.
I can see it now, game subs sold on contracts like cell phones. You'll have pay as you go, x minute/month plans (complete with overage charges), and unlimited plans. I'm so excited to see the horrible time wasting crap the studios come up with.
I can picture huge spawling worlds, with no insta-travel (or even high speed travel) and mounts will of course be an additional monthly charge. Either combat speed will be slow, quest kill counts will be very high, or quest mobs will be very spread out. Queues will be everywhere, from shop keepers who only deal with 1 person at a time to long and frequent load screens (w/ ads since this is a total money grab screw job).
I can't help but think of the Arcade Era when I read your post.
One of the unavoidable truths of arcade games is that they were designed to kill the player quickly, as that meant more quarters for vendors. As a result, arcade games needed to remain simplistic in order to keep plays short and revenues high.
http://www.ubyssey.ca/?p=7940
Sure, it almost seems like a negative thing... but when I examine western gaming history... I almost saw the F2P market as inevitable.
Though I can't really explain why or how... it just feels like this is and was bound to happen since the dawn of MMO's.
Perhaps... an endless cycle that merely changes the forms that it appears. The F2P shopping-market will likely become a dominant form of online entertainment until it is time for it to change again.
As gamers’ tastes grew sophisticated, interest in arcade games dwindled and most large-format gaming centres closed down. Cabinets started disappearing from donut shops and grocery stores.
Give it time, eventually it will change back.... right now this is what the market wants it seems. Maybe 4-6 years?
or perhaps developers need a new way to develop games that drastically cuts down on costs so that they don't have to go to these methods.
Free to play, aka micro transaction business model is the epitomy of capitalisation, which in turn is a western philosophy.
So you're right, it was inevitable and it is only the older MMO gamers who are going to complain about it, as they have been spoilt with a wealth of subscription MMOs for over a decade now.
When you're new in the gender and know little about it, it's easier to get enticed by a "free" game (as in free in appearances only). When you know a bit more about how things work, it's harder to justify.
I've noticed a lot of hate towards the F2P model, and how it's some sort of infection from Asia.
Here's a little something to clue you in. It was the west that came up with the idea.
Back in the 90s, there were several MUDs that were free to play, but had added incentive to "donate" to keep the game alive. These incentives included stat bonuses, experience tweaks, gear. Any number of things. And it wasn't exactly a small amount of money, either. Some were getting thousands of dollars per year from a player base that numbered in a few dozen. Some of these MUDs still exist, and are still using those microtransactions to stay alive, despite the fact that the player base for text-based games has severely dwindled over the past 10 years.
What asian game makers did was just went back to the roots. But instead of focusing on a few dozen people, they focused on thousands. Some in the millions. Many of the games may not appeal to the western market, but RoM is one of the few that do. And now that SOE has paved the way as a major western player entering the F2P market, others will follow. And will be successful.
So for people crying about this model somehow ruining MMORPGs, just remember that the roots of MMOs started with MUDs, and they had this model first. So what I suggest is instead of whining about it, actually accept that this is coming in greater force, and let these game companies know what you will and will not pay for. Try to work with them, and you'll probably find it'll be a rewarding experience. Just don't assume that gear and exp bottles is all that mictransactions are, and then dismiss the entire concept out of hand. It's better to have options, especially if it means good games actually see the light of day.
This, although don't leave out his one author crusade to convince everyone here how inevitable the F2P market model is.
Also, not like SOE has any interest in sucking in the younger audience with a F2P game so they can grow up and nag mommy to buy them one of those "better" subscription games or a station pass is it?
I've tried both of those games, so don't assume about my gaming history. The reason I do not play them now has nothing to do with item malls and everything to do with the fact that they are not AAA titles, but inferior F2P games. Yes, inferior. They do not have the polish of a AAA P2P game.
But now, developers with money are adopting this F2P item mall crap, and it incenses me. Sony, Turbine, and other big developers are hopping on this crapwagon.
And while I cannot, of course, claim that EVERY game with an item mall is selling PvP advantages, I know for a fact some DO. Which goes back to my point about RMT being a creeping infection that will consume everything in it's path eventually.
I agree with the Kitten of Doom.
SCREW RMT and f2p BOTH, if you ask me. Nothing worth much is EVER free. Didn't any of your mommies ever teach you that? They will FIND a way to make money, and frankly, I prefer a monthly fee that I don't have to think about all the time.
Incidentally, FreeRealms, Perfect World, and many others (I've played a goodly amount of them) ALL offer advantages to at LEAST xp, hp and mana regen, and faster mounts for cash. FreeRealms offers weapons that do a great deal more dmg and have way higher stat bonuses than what you can get until much higher levels without cash. How can you NOT see that as advantageous? It warps the playing field and is entirely unfair.
Exactly, I think there are bigger issues with the genre than F2P or Subscription, like levels vs skills and grind vs fun, but there is a place for micro transactions in MMOs, just not how most of the F2P games do it.
I though have a somewhat distorted view of the whole thing, as someone who works for a games publisher, I often see the business practicality as well as the gamers needs, so I can't condemn what is a very good way to make money. :)
What complete nonsense. The only way to the top in RoM is through spending lots of money on the item shop. Sure you can buy some of the stuff you need, but the only way to pay for such is mindless grinding with time most of us do not have.
So you can disagree, but you are flat out wrong in your assumption.
If you can't afford $15 a month you shouldn't be wasting time playing games in the first place.
F2P are a plague. They are a low quality product that is diluting the MMO market w/ a bunch of trash games that promote in-game power by using real-life currency to buy your way to the top. It's basically game companies gold selling in their own games. I greatly resent the asian market that is allowing this games to currently thrive and reproduce.
It might be different if they were actually competitive in quality to a P2P. But even if your spending $15+ a month in the cash shop, its still a painfully inferior item compared to a P2P game.
Blizzard has a very harsh stance towards gold selling. Which is basically what a micro-transaction game is.
Because Aion is a quality MMO that doesn't need to stoop to being a F2P to compete in the market. Pretty much everyone I know that is interested in Aion and plans on buying it at launch would completely lose interest if it became a micro-transaction game, including me.
Can you cite which MMOs you are referring to?
I'm also interested in whether you think those are the exception or the norm with item mall MMOs.
Easy question, RoM, Perfect World, Atlantica Online... I believe those are the big 3 right now for f2p games in the western market. You obviously don't play any of the f2p games much.
I've been a gamer for 30 years. F2P games (IMO) fall outside the realm of "game" and in to the realm of "social networking."
Not to mention they invariablly suck major arse. I've tried many F2P to see what the big deal was about. I can see how it would appeal to poor kids, but I can can afford subscription models and prefer a level playing ground and the 10 fold increase in quality one gets using that model.
The last one I tried was Atlantica Online. Everything about it was terribad. Story? What story? Lore? Wut? Quest assist that literally walks you character to the next objective for you? Are you serious? Have we become that lazy? The turn based combat was interesting, but got old very fast. I've spent decades playing games that are steeped in storytelling and lore (pnp RGPs, historical wargaming, etc). This is why I think every F2P mmo world is a joke. They are usually terrible environments populated with cardboard characters (and players) with dialogue in broken English that doesn't relate to anything going on in said world. How do you expect me to get immersed in such a world? I guess that wouldn't matter if you obsession is level/skill capping ASAP then jumping on the gear train. Sorry, that makes for a crap mmos.
I'd rather play a SP game any day than a F2P mmo. Hell, I'd rather play solitaire on my iPod than a F2P mmo.
And as someone else above me said, if you can't afford $10-$15 per month (and aren't under 14 years old) you shouldn't be playing mmos and should go get a job or something. =)
I agree with the Kitten of Doom.
SCREW RMT and f2p BOTH, if you ask me. Nothing worth much is EVER free. Didn't any of your mommies ever teach you that? They will FIND a way to make money, and frankly, I prefer a monthly fee that I don't have to think about all the time.
Incidentally, FreeRealms, Perfect World, and many others (I've played a goodly amount of them) ALL offer advantages to at LEAST xp, hp and mana regen, and faster mounts for cash. FreeRealms offers weapons that do a great deal more dmg and have way higher stat bonuses than what you can get until much higher levels without cash. How can you NOT see that as advantageous? It warps the playing field and is entirely unfair.
Correct.
Subscription based games and F2P based games are developed from different viewpoints and goals. They are not made the same so the results are different.
A developer of a subscription based game wants to keep players subscribed as long as possible. They do this by adding content, goals, items and things of that nature as in game achievements. The longer someone plays the longer they remain a customer and the more money they make. Their incentive is to make their gameplay better to retain players.
Free to play item mall games have a different philosophy. They make money through item sales, so items have to be desirable. To keep players buying items, they must increase in their desirability which in turn fuels mudflation. There is a limit to the amount of cosmetic features that players will buy into before they have had their fill. That doesn't leave many other avenues for developers to create desirable items for players to purchase. Making a better play experience for the entire playerbase is almost counter productive to the business model. These types of games need to make the premium buyers gameplay superior in an effort to draw players into the cash shops. Essentially these types of games make money by withholding content from players or making the free play so tedious that it is almost exactly oposite of a subscription based game. The methods used to persuade people to use the cash shops are often counterproductive to entertaining gameplay.
To me it is a self defeating business model.
F2P works just fine for all those MMOs, where you don't have to compete with others.
For every MMO that focuses on PvP, F2P isn't an option tho, as you need a level playingfield, which you can only achieve by having every player paying the same price.
Having more time then others isn't an argument here, as having more time will allways favour you, in whatever game you play.
Try to imagine games like CounterStrike or Starcraft being F2P...
And c'mon... P2P is allmost allways of much much higher quality then those F2P-titles. MMOs with P2P can afford customer-support, GMs and Devs working on the game constantly, whereas F2P-titles allmost ever fall short in this department.
Right off the top of my head...Conquer Online springs to mind. In order to have a ton of +5 or higher enhanced dual-slotted gear with the best gems, you could spend months farming things with a 1/100 drop rate to make said upgrades, realizing that each upgrade has a less chance than the last to work (until you're looking at 1/100 chance of the upgrade going through, so we're talking 10,000 or more kills for a success)....or you could spend a ton of rl money now and have it in a day. And since all the best players are geared like that...to keep up you have to be too.
Gunbound also springs to mind, though not an RPG...the best gear comes from the item malls, and makes a HUGE difference in stats.
Many (not all, but many) Item-mall based MMOs sell items who create a VERY defined edge in player power. Those with a credit card to burn stay well ahead of those who have not.
You cited 2 out of the several hundred that exist. Add in War Rock and three or four others and you still have a list that is the extreme exception and not the rule.
I have been a faithful reader of MMORPG.com for a few years now. Not untill now have I ever wondered if this site is a sell out. I now do not read this site as often as I use to and will probably read less as it feels game producer's objectives are being shoved down our throats.
Item shops benefit only the developer, no one else. There are better models to use to help casual players. How about making a pay as you go model? What about making more casual based games without the timesinks? There are better ways.
Include me in there too.
I believe many examples were mentioned already, such as Conquer Online, Gunbound, Atlantica Online, Perfect World, Runes of Magic.
From my own experience, I can mention Tales Runner, Gunbound (they aren't MMOs, but they're listed here in MMORPG.com, so I don't see why I cannot mention them), RF Online, Rohan: Blood Feud, Ragnarok Online, Priston Tale, Atlantica, Dofus and Lunia. With so many examples, I cannot see them as an exception to item mall's model.
In these item malls, you will see what I'm classifying as three generic kinds of items, in order from first to last "resource" a developer will use in their item mall. Please show me a MMO only using the first kind of item mall item mentioned below, and give it a few patches so we can see if it has not gone into the other kind of items.
1 - Purely Cosmetical Items - These usually are the ones the game is released with, so they can say their item mall is purely cosmetical. This may be truth, but only valid until the next patch that increases item mall with the other kind of items... They are merely cosmetical, but that means they will be highly attractive. In order to make them generate more money for the developer, games might make them temporary. Being cosmetical does not mean they will be cheap, you can see them costing $5, $10, $15 or even more. Anyway, there are really purely optional.
2 - Timed Game-improving Items - These are your general +XP, +Stats, +Speed, +Drop modification items/mounts/wings/whatever. You will rarely, if ever, see them as permanent items. They can appear in the form of hidden subscriptions or potions. Again, if you "subscribe" to them you will face a cost probably superior to your general $15 in a P2P MMO, and you are still susceptible to the other kinds of items an item mall offers.
3 - Upgrading Materials - This is your most dangerous kind of item avaiable. A game using this probably features some item upgrading system with slim sucess chances for those not using the items avaiable here (or a thousand-long hour grind), which does not necessarily mean they will have succeed when using them. This is what will destroy balance in your MMO, as players using these will become exceedingly powerful solely based on their luck with the system and the money they spent improving their luck (after all, in a luck system you will eventually succeed, it is all a matter of number of attempts). This is an endless sink using REAL MONEY, if someone spends thousands of dollars a month in a F2P game, they are spending on THIS, and they are pwning you because of it (or not, they could be unlucky, which makes it an even more sad scenario, someone spending thousands of dollars in a roulette cassino system with... generated bits that any retard can learn to do in a few weeks or months, it's like burning money).
I can see it now, game subs sold on contracts like cell phones. You'll have pay as you go, x minute/month plans (complete with overage charges), and unlimited plans. I'm so excited to see the horrible time wasting crap the studios come up with.
I can picture huge spawling worlds, with no insta-travel (or even high speed travel) and mounts will of course be an additional monthly charge. Either combat speed will be slow, quest kill counts will be very high, or quest mobs will be very spread out. Queues will be everywhere, from shop keepers who only deal with 1 person at a time to long and frequent load screens (w/ ads since this is a total money grab screw job).
This twist of the pay-for-time model can be possible, but it will not happen. People want better MMOs, and these steps you show do not provide a better MMO experience.
My vision of the alternatives for a casual player are:
- Pay For Hours - Used in some asian countries. You pay for "units" which are equal to X hours each unit. I paid $9 for 50 China Aion hours (that's an average of around 1hr30min per day if I played them within 30 days, but I'm not bound to the 30-day obligation). This does not mean you won't see the usual $15/month option plan.
- Pay For Content - Used in Guild Wars, also used in a F2P MMO called Wizard 101 (unfortunately this game also has an item mall and also offers a premium subscription). You make one-time payments for a certain amount of content, in the form of areas, expansions, campaigns, whatever. You are not paying for virtual items as in an item mall, you are directly buying content for you to play. It can be cheap like in Wizard 101, $1~$3 per area, of $50 per campaign like in Guild Wars (however each campaign in Guild Wars means dozens or hundred hours of fun, a very large bulk of content comparable to a retail game).
Why are these good for casual players? Because the efficiency of how you spend your money is in a more equal ground to even the 24/7 player. In Pay For Content it doesn't matter how many hours/day you play, you will purchase the next content when you want to.
Another take.
In the early weeks/months of EQ (I ask no forgiveness for the flat statement, that there will never be a time like that again, unless a miracle happens. It's been 10 years, still waiting, LOL. Many games since have been better games...but have not had that feeling...you had to be there) there arose a difficulty. The idea by the designers was to make grouping imperative. But the experience rewards for the classes were different. For example, the worst xp for an encounter was by the troll shadow knights, because they had self-regen. So no one wanted to group with an SK. And if people played regularly together, their levels would diverge. And then grouping didnt work. So the problem was not to discourage people from grouping because of class, so the xp rewards were changed.
What does this have to do with micro-transactions? Well, if a major part of the mmo experience is playing with other people (otherwise why is it an mmo?) then if some people buy xp potions, blah, blah, etc., then the levels of players will diverge very rapidly. Even among those who pay, because some will pay more. That will tend to destroy such social instruments as guilds. And guilds are demanded by players, even as they demand the availablity of a solo experience. It is just a powerful way to pull people apart rather than get them together.
Why did Blizzard start using rested xp bonuses? To tend to bring people together. How much it helps I don't know, but it is the right direction. I might suggest that the solo experience in WoW makes another potential contribution --- it gives people a method to possibly catch up...if you were stuck needing your usual group, you would never narrow a level gap.
Ask any old timer like me. People tend to forget the game play details somewhat But not the friends they made. I have played in guilds that lasted for years, and I will never forget the people I knew, good and bad.
The griefers won't care about this, LOL.
My point of view is that of one looking for the possiblity of a game that will be a vehicle for a long term interaction with other players, not just a trivial pastime like an arcade game. That is the kind of game worth paying for, and worth paying for a long time. Do any of the FTP games vaguely suggest the possibiltiy of being played regularly for several YEARS? I think not. What games have had people do that? EQ, DAOC, WoW. And I would think the developers would be looking for that too, but what do I know.
I can see it now, game subs sold on contracts like cell phones. You'll have pay as you go, x minute/month plans (complete with overage charges), and unlimited plans. I'm so excited to see the horrible time wasting crap the studios come up with.
I can picture huge spawling worlds, with no insta-travel (or even high speed travel) and mounts will of course be an additional monthly charge. Either combat speed will be slow, quest kill counts will be very high, or quest mobs will be very spread out. Queues will be everywhere, from shop keepers who only deal with 1 person at a time to long and frequent load screens (w/ ads since this is a total money grab screw job).
This twist of the pay-for-time model can be possible, but it will not happen. People want better MMOs, and these steps you show do not provide a better MMO experience.
My vision of the alternatives for a casual player are:
- Pay For Hours - Used in some asian countries. You pay for "units" which are equal to X hours each unit. I paid $9 for 50 China Aion hours (that's an average of around 1hr30min per day if I played them within 30 days, but I'm not bound to the 30-day obligation). This does not mean you won't see the usual $15/month option plan.
- Pay For Content - Used in Guild Wars, also used in a F2P MMO called Wizard 101 (unfortunately this game also has an item mall and also offers a premium subscription). You make one-time payments for a certain amount of content, in the form of areas, expansions, campaigns, whatever. You are not paying for virtual items as in an item mall, you are directly buying content for you to play. It can be cheap like in Wizard 101, $1~$3 per area, of $50 per campaign like in Guild Wars (however each campaign in Guild Wars means dozens or hundred hours of fun, a very large bulk of content comparable to a retail game).
Why are these good for casual players? Because the efficiency of how you spend your money is in a more equal ground to even the 24/7 player. In Pay For Content it doesn't matter how many hours/day you play, you will purchase the next content when you want to.
Excellent post. Thanks for that intelligent write up. I am one that would never play an RMT game with items/gold for sell but I would play the pay for time/content models you describe.
You guys are producing some amazing post today. I have enjoyed the read. Thank you!
I never meant for it to be a "better" MMO, just to show a sad extreme of the PfT model. Honestly no billing system or revenue stream will provide a better MMO experience, all they do is change how you pay for it. And when it comes down to it, the second you think about how you're paying for it crosses your mind while playing, you should quit.
Oh yeah I use "" around better because players are a diverse group. What you see as better could very well be the very things I hate about a game.
Well I will keep playing MMO's till they all go F2P in which case I will never play another MMO ever again. They are just big scams in which you can't do anything about. I pay $229.40 a year depending if theres a Expansion released otherwise I pay $179.40 a year now with a cash shop it could be double that because they charge so much for the items in the cash shop and give you so little of the currency to buy the items. I will stick with P2P much easier I have access to all game content I'm not dishing out money every week or every other week.
There are many item shop models, and a westernized version could easily address peoples concerns.
I actual dislike the two western models so far (DDO and Free Realms). It appears free, but its just an
extended trial that allows you to preview quite a lot of content, but not really experience it till you pay.
Station Exchange is a brilliant idea. It gives people the option of playing on a server in which things
can be bought and sold legitimately. I think the majority of people don't tend to factor in one major
thing...Time. We all know time is money. Some people have more of one that the other, and it seems
a brilliant idea to bring the two of them together to mutual benefit.
"I think the majority of people don't tend to factor in one major
thing...Time. We all know time is money. Some people have more of one that the other, and it seems
a brilliant idea to bring the two of them together to mutual benefit."
In response to those who make this argument: You seem to forget this is a GAME and time does not equal money. Professional game players, be the game poker, football, or tiddlywinks, get better by investing TIME. Practice makes perfect. And buying your way to the top is generally considered cheating.
"- Pay For Content - Used in Guild Wars, also used in a F2P MMO called Wizard 101 (unfortunately this game also has an item mall and also offers a premium subscription). You make one-time payments for a certain amount of content, in the form of areas, expansions, campaigns, whatever. You are not paying for virtual items as in an item mall, you are directly buying content for you to play. It can be cheap like in Wizard 101, $1~$3 per area, of $50 per campaign like in Guild Wars (however each campaign in Guild Wars means dozens or hundred hours of fun, a very large bulk of content comparable to a retail game)."
A little OT---I greatly suspect Star Wars: The Old Republic will be using this model. It keeps new content profitable, and this game will need a steady stream of new content for the ongoing story.
I really hope they do go with the pay by the content like Guild Wars. If there is an item shop though, sadly I will be skipping this title.
There is nothing about F2P that seems appealing to me. The old saying "you get what you pay for" definitely applies here.
DDO is not true F2P in my opinion...it is basically an elaborate trial for the P2P version. This is the closest F2P will ever get to going mainstream in America, and probably Europe as well.
I will never participate in a game based around an item mall. I just hate those things.
My basic opinion of F2P falls in line with what's already been said against it so I wont repost what others have said. That being said I don't see any big name (AAA) titles being _released_ "in the west" under the F2P/Micro-transaction pay scheme for several more years, if ever. Everything thus far has been as stated, either smaller "B" level games or last ditch effort type things from games going under.
As far as the comments about MMORPG/Richard 'force feeding" F2P... These guys gotta pay the bills. I highly doubt they're deciding to put the majority of their adds to F2P just because they want to. It's likely the F2P guys are just offering more, perhaps way more, for the add space. If it means I get a great site to come read up on the MMO news then I can ignore the adds F2P or otherwise. (Tho RTM adds would prolly make me visit less, tbo). If you dun lije what Richard is posting about don't read it. It's his blog and if he's on a F2P thing then you can just ignore it and wait for something else. Honestly I dun care for the topic either. This is the first one I've bothered reading and frankly I skipped most of it and went right to the thread, heh.
Hmm, interesting thoughts. Good article. Not sure about developers switching to F2P mode as a way to attract more players or just a last straw before the closing of the project. What I am sure about is that F2P games were popular 1-2 years ago on the western market and this year especially. There has been at least 5 new F2P games released and I would say that Jade Dynasty will hold the top and will steadily grow and most likely outgrow Runes of magic and Atlantica Online.
There are people who deeply hate F2P games because of their Item Malls. And there are others who actually like to play those games specifically because of the Item Mall. Some players like to have an upper hand in PvP by spending hundreds of dollars, others like to just enjoy the PvE part of the game while remain casual and not pushing themselves too much thanks to Item Mall again.
What I've noticed is that formula of success for F2P games is reasonable prices on Item Mall and challenging environment for those who play for free. I want to use Jade Dynasty again as an example and I think between the last 4 F2P games I've played JD has reached that golden solution that allows to keep players engaged on the daily basis. A bit steep learning curve that may throw off the balance a regular WoW player who used to be 'taught' everything but game still has a lot of options and things to do. I think that somewhat challenging learning curve actually attracts players in their late teens and leaves behind the main WOW playerbase.
Any of these F2P games I've played for the last 2 years I can tell you without a doubt that there will be more of them and competition will be pretty big. Not all, but some games make really serious steps to make the product attractive and very appealing to the casual players with some extra buck in their wallets. JD is still in "Open Beta" (well they better fix all the bugs and finish the game and finally release it) and there are already tons of people. I mean TONS, on the daily basis. Especially on the weekends all the realms are full. Sometimes game feels a bit too small for all the people and their "vending monkeys" around. Will it continue like this? It depends of course. PWI better work on this game hard if they want people to stay. Maybe after "leveling marathon" is over a lot of kids will leave, but nobody knows anything much about end game content yet. People are getting close to level 90 and devs only now are talking about putting in the content. Thats what rumors are about at least.
There's a certain way of thinking that suggests that no matter what job a person does, they should get paid exactly the same amount as any other person. For example, someone whose sole job is to take out the trash should get paid the same as someone who is operating a space shuttle. On the other hand, another way of thinking suggests that people should be paid according to the perceived value they add to a society. The latter is arguably more characteristic of the West.
As it is, with a subscription based game, the person who plays 400 hours per month pays exactly the same amount as the person who plays 8 hours per month, if you ignore things like electricity and such. Now tell me, which way of thinking is this consistent with?
On the other hand, a microtransaction based game allows a consumer to pay for EXACTLY the amount of entertainment the consumer wishes to. For those of you who have taken an economics course, you understand. For everyone else, well, sorry.
Microtransactions is the preferred way of doing business in Asia. It is successful. There is no arguing this point. And, no matter how you may want to cry about it or detest it, it's not going away. Things change. Deal with it.
Let's say you go to a fast food restaurant, and you want a Double Cheeseburger, but the only way to get one is by buying a Double Cheeseburger Meal for $8 which also includes Fries and a Drink. But you're not thirsty and you don't like fries. You only want a Double Cheeseburger. So what do you do? Well, let's say this is the only restaurant in town that serves Double Cheeseburgers. So you talk to the manager and ask him if you can just buy the Double Cheeseburger for a reduced cost, say $2. What does he do? He points you to the Terms of Use on the wall you agreed to by walking into the restaurant and you buy the Double Cheeseburger meal. Of course this not a realistic situation, but I hope you get the point.
I played World of Warcraft for close to 100 hours a week for nearly a year straight. Why and how? Because I was financially able to. In other words, I had the MONEY to not work and was able to put in the TIME to get 3 level 80's reasonably geared. How is this different than having the disposable income to spend in an item shop to get an advantage in a microtransaction based MMORPG? Time is money folks. Players with an excess of time and/or money will ALWAYS have the advantage in any game you care to play.
Ok, if you can use a burger metaphor, let me use a ... GAME ... metaphor. Maybe my metaphor, having to do with GAMES, is more appropriate? Who knows, just stirring the pot.
I used to be a chess player. When I went to a tournament, everyone paid the same entry fee. Some people practiced a lot more, paid to go to a lot more tournaments for more experience, even perhaps paid a coach. However.
When we got to the table, the rules and the pieces were exactly the same. Nobody got to pay $10 extra and get a super king that could move 2 spaces a turn in addition to its normal turn. Nobody could buy two turns to start to get ahead of his opponent. It came down to who was better at the table that game.
And that's the sense that I think offends people. It ought to be a level playing field --- because otherwise it isn't a game, its something *else*. Maybe people might like something *else* somewhere. Not the point. If my strategy and tactics are better and I am playing a game (according to my definition of course) I ought to win more often. Shall we play holdem and I get an extra card down!? Ok, so in MMOs some people play more and get better stuff....but in a *fair* MMO...everyone will have the same opportunity. Being rich may give you more time but not nuclear weapons.
Course some people like it that the Yankees always get the best free agent players --- if they want. But a LOT don't.
Seems simple to me, tell me what I missed please?!
The problem I see with this genre today is that the publishers are trying so desperately to make money, they've forgotten how to make compelling games. And this is true in both the so-called F2P and P2P models.
I'd have to say that the last game that seriously approached the art of game design is World of Warcraft. It was not designed to make money, it was designed to be a good game. The money came as a result of the goodness of the game.
But I don't think it's possible to design a game to make money and expect a good game as a result, at least in this genre. At least in casino games you have the chance to walk away with something real, but what do you really walk away with when you pay more money into MMO land? Nothing really.
The "value" of MMO entertainment is kind of like the Wizard of Oz. It looks impressive until you pull back the curtain and realize there's nothing there. I used to laugh my ass off when I used to see Stones of Jordan from Diablo II auctioned off on eBay for real cash. I still do. It made me wonder what sort of person would pay the kind of money they do for a figment of the imagination.
When I got into MMOs, I started to understand a little bit better why people would pay so much for SoJs and the like. You see, the only reason why someone would ever pay real money for illusionary things is if they believed the illusions were real. The only way people would delve deeper into the fiction is if the fiction had some meaning for them.
And this is why games that are designed to make money are not going to be as successful as games that are designed well. Because the whole "hook" of these games is believing what you are doing has value. And how can you value what you are doing when the publisher's money making efforts are so transparent?
A game that is designed around a revenue model is like trying to be the Wizard of Oz when the curtain is drawn wide open: there's no reason to play. Because people have to believe that the things they are doing in the game are worth something before they are willing to do something as silly as buying illusionary items...and it really is, in all seriousness, silly to do.
The only reason we had such a huge black market in virtual goods up until now is that the worlds that were designed were so compelling, we bought into the illusion that virtual goods weren't really virtual. But that's when the great designers were in charge of making games...and they made good games that made us want to buy into what was going on in there.
But they aren't in charge anymore. It's the financial and marketing guys that are wearing the pants in game design...and it shows. Nothing that can come from these folks is worth believing in, because all they believe in is market share and revenue generation. Having these folks ask gamers to pay good money for their fantasy is like them expecting us to take the Wizard of Oz seriously with the curtain drawn...it ain't gonna happen. Which is why I think all of this talk over F2P versus P2P by the bigwigs is just empty.
It ain't a matter of F2P or P2P or ways of monetizing a figment of the imagination. It's a matter of making good games, because only then is it a fiction worth playing (and paying) the fool for.
i agre check fopr example guild wars its a fairly old game did you go back latelly if you got newer graphic card you ll see very cool effect ,when you have eotn at the first screen if you turn cam you ll see i fire bin hell the eat effect is even shown,no lag whatsoever lush graphic and insane pvp dam its a 4 year old game ,you like pve no biggy they got a very good story too cg etc
gees no wonder when you check on xfire if always in the top
you love pvp strategie etc this game is like next gen of chess lol it is very hard to win in pvp
wow its the same lol its an old game too but they dont sit on their laurel every expension they add graphic enhencement
last time it was better toon graphic in northrend
but most new game dont bother or if they try they build the game on machine that nobody has
guild wars works because when they dev it they used laptop to build and test if it didnt work they didnt put it in the game
i bet it took em way longer to design this game but dam its still the one of the top game
if they use the same way to build gw2 lol they could charge a monthly fee and still be popular
they got insane competition etc
one that might look promissing come september is rune of magic i saw and heard the video gees if it sound and look like that it will be very popular they might have to add server then lol cause its summer and its already running at high when people dont work
I enjoyed reading your post. It makes a lot more sense than a fast food analogy.
It's pretty obvious that the point I wanted to demonstrate with my fast food analogy didn't quite get across.
I'm not an idealist. I don't believe in what "ought to be a level playing field." As far as I'm concerned there are no level playing fields, in ANY aspect of life, video games included. Are you seriously telling me that the person who had the TIME to study chess or practice it, or the MONEY to purchase guides or tutoring sessions, is NOT going to have an advantage at a chess tournament? The entry fee may be the same, but the players certainly are not. Are you going to tell me also that the person who learned chess the day before the tournament has an equal chance to win the tournament simply because the entry fee was the same?
There's a movie called Pleasantville. You may like it.
My point is simply that microtransactions allow people to spend the exact amount of money for the exact amount of "fun" that they want out of a game.
And are we not talking about MMORPG's here? There is not a single MMORPG that does not give an advantage based on the amount of time or money spent in the game.
I started doing PvP in World of Warcraft towards the end of The Burning Crusade, when nearly everyone had full Season 2 or better PvP gear. There's your "ought to be level playing field" in the most popular subscription based game.
Watch Pleasantville, but I doubt you'd get the point the writers wanted to get across.
I'd have to say that the novice has an equal chance to win against a chess master...because there is nothing the master can do that the novice can't.
The difference has nothing to do with what the pieces can do. The difference has to do with the relative experience of the two.
But this whole microtransaction business isn't about differences in the players. It's about differences in the pieces. It's a business model that's all about letting chess novices win over chess masters by buying more pieces. It's about selling the novice the pleasure of saying "I win I win," but what exactly did he win? A person like that isn't a winner...he's a loser. And if he ever rids himself of the delusion that whipping out a credit card for pointless pursuits and insubstantial "internet goods" makes him a hero, he'll realize that he's the loser too. And what he lost is a whole lot of time and money partaking in a fantasy that isn't even all that fantastic. In fact, it's rather pathetic.
Part of the reason so many people here on the boards are so jaded is because we are starting to see how foolish we were for spending so much time and money on something that never really got any better. And the ultimate result of every game is the same: it's going to go dark, and nothing you or I ever did there is going to mean anything. And at that point, buying that ultimate sword of pwnage or that nice set of clothes for $10 is goint to look and seem really stupid. Because you certainly can't talk about how cool it was to anyone but possibly we here at MMORPG.com. And even so, it isn't like we can just join the game to see how cool your toon was once the server goes dark.
I heard a saying about life once that "he with the most toys at the end, wins." There's a different saying in MMO land. Because in MMO land, "he who pays the least at the end, loses the least." Because it never lasts, and paying more only gives you more reasons to pay even more.
And this is true in pay to play as well as micro...but the micro scheme makes losing so much easier.
To the author, Richard Aihoshi:
Hey, new DDO is already mixing F2P with it's hybrid appraoch, with even more hybrid: you can subscribe as well and get all!
So the innovation you wrote about in the last paragraph of this article is already done - Turbine is absolutely first here to do it.
. Turbine shows their genius once more.
NDA is obove me, so I will only it has potential to compete with the best on the MMO Market
before answering i would like to mention that in my opinion the overly used term "free-to-play" should be called by what it is :
MICORTRANSACTIONS !
ok, so here are my 5 cents to the topic:
1. some forum members already stated that many microtransaction-games lack in overall quality and i only can agree to this observation.
2. i tried out runes of magic some weeks ago to see what one of the better judged microtransaction-games was able to provide, and the impression the game made on me was disappointing. if the better microtransaction games look like this i will spare me the time too look at the rest of them.
* runes of magic (RoM) looked very asian to me with many manga like characters and all female chars wearing mini-skirts like in a japanes comic book. as a western player i always found this at best silly :) nothing to feel really exited about. most of the microtransaction-games swamp over from /korea/asia and are primarily targeted at that audience with it's very special astethic favourites *smiles* (think of the scoolgirl and catgirl fetish market in japan for example). as a european i only can shake my head at this, but at least its funny :)
* the most dissappointing aspect in technical terms was the graphics quality. at least here i would have expected some quality so that RoM can contest the players in the subscrition market. i like toget involved in the atmosphere of a game and the world it provides but that was so much dispappionting (comparing with WoW as an example) that i felt completely put off.
After these very personal statements my finally very personal conclusion:
1. i pay for subription based games for a reason! => thats quality because it cant be provided on a consistent base without a cosiderable amount of money a company con definitely count on. so there is a real (entertainment) value for my euros and i have no objection to pay for this value.
2. microtransaction games try to achieve greater gains than possible with a ordinary subscription by "tricking" the customers into the mindsets that its "free" and/or "cheap" due to the fact of distributing costs over tiny aka MICRO payments. this can be problematic if players (e.g kids) lose track of the costs involved with it. i am not a fan of this sheme.
before answering i would like to mention that in my opinion the overly used term "free-to-play" should be called by what it is :
MICORTRANSACTIONS !
ok, so here are my 5 cents to the topic:
1. some forum members already stated that many microtransaction-games lack in overall quality and i only can agree to this observation.
2. i tried out runes of magic some weeks ago to see what one of the better judged microtransaction-games was able to provide, and the impression the game made on me was disappointing. if the better microtransaction games look like this i will spare me the time too look at the rest of them.
* runes of magic (RoM) looked very asian to me with many manga like characters and all female chars wearing mini-skirts like in a japanes comic book. as a western player i always found this at best silly :) nothing to feel really exited about. most of the microtransaction-games swamp over from /korea/asia and are primarily targeted at that audience with it's very special astethic favourites *smiles* (think of the scoolgirl and catgirl fetish market in japan for example). as a european i only can shake my head at this, but at least its funny :)
* the most dissappointing aspect in technical terms was the graphics quality. at least here i would have expected some quality so that RoM can contest the players in the subscrition market. i like toget involved in the atmosphere of a game and the world it provides but that was so much dispappionting (comparing with WoW as an example) that i felt completely put off.
After these very personal statements my finally very personal conclusion:
1. i pay for subription based games for a reason! => thats quality because it cant be provided on a consistent base without a cosiderable amount of money a company con definitely count on. so there is a real (entertainment) value for my euros and i have no objection to pay for this value.
2. microtransaction games try to achieve greater gains than possible with a ordinary subscription by "tricking" the customers into the mindsets that its "free" and/or "cheap" due to the fact of distributing costs over tiny aka MICRO payments. this can be problematic if players (e.g kids) lose track of the costs involved with it. i am not a fan of this sheme.
So what about fully developed subscription-based AAA ranked game in F2P / Microtransaction / sub model all at once? With your choice over anything? And even developed to be better while preparing for this change (check press)?
That's something that Turbine devs announce for D&D Online (DDO)
.
If in doubts, check those articles:
www.tentonhammer.com/ddo
So what about fully developed subscription-based AAA ranked game in F2P / Microtransaction / sub model all at once? With your choice over anything? And even developed to be better while preparing for this change (check press)?
That's something that Turbine devs announce for D&D Online (DDO)
.
If in doubts, check those articles:
www.tentonhammer.com/ddo
After looking at the official DDO site the things get even more complex, so the answer is not that simple. i had also a look at sony online entertainments "solution" aka their introduction of real world money transactions via a new store.
How the entire venture fairs semms to largely depend on:
1. How are you able to make it acceptable for your current customers, and very important how to comunicate it to them.
* in the case of Sony i think they really pissed off quite a good part of their customers (behold thats just my impression from what i have read thus far. Please Sony customers comment on what i have stated here!).
* from the Sony solution i got the impression that the real world money store ist just there to get as much money out of the game as possible without thinking of the consequences this might have on the whole player base regarding balance and game expierience. The poll here on mmorpg.com yields a devastating over 60% that this will be bad and have negative impact.
2. How do you combine it with the subscription based player base. if you cannot convince them that enjoing the "whole" (i like this term regarding an mmorpg *smiles*) game is possible without a snowball-like investment of real world money you will probably loose them.
3. The added value of the subscription should be meaningfull and not simply outbuyable from the respective store and on the other hand the store should be evean for the subsribing players hold interresting stuff they might want to own at reasonble price. No SUPER items should be sold in stores as this will start the snowwball roling :)
Finally:
From my superficial look at the official DDO site i think there are some interresting ideas to combine the two pament styles in to a coherent whole, for example ehanced user support/vip membership i have not seen so far.
BUT if this really works has to be shown and is mainly dependent on some complex balancing and added value marketing tasks.
I've talked to a lot of gamers here in the US and none of them are too thrilled with the free-to-play, pay-for-everything games that are coming out.
I know that personally, I prefer paying a flat rate every month and letting my skill get me the gear/loot I want instead of forking over real dollars to buy it. I think that takes a lot away from the game.
I don't agree with and I don't like free-to-play games and I won't be playing any. I'll stick with my subscription based games, thanks.
After looking at the official DDO site the things get even more complex, so the answer is not that simple. i had also a look at sony online entertainments "solution" aka their introduction of real world money transactions via a new store.
How the entire venture fairs semms to largely depend on:
1. How are you able to make it acceptable for your current customers, and very important how to comunicate it to them.
* in the case of Sony i think they really pissed off quite a good part of their customers (behold thats just my impression from what i have read thus far. Please Sony customers comment on what i have stated here!).
* from the Sony solution i got the impression that the real world money store ist just there to get as much money out of the game as possible without thinking of the consequences this might have on the whole player base regarding balance and game expierience. The poll here on mmorpg.com yields a devastating over 60% that this will be bad and have negative impact.
2. How do you combine it with the subscription based player base. if you cannot convince them that enjoing the "whole" (i like this term regarding an mmorpg *smiles*) game is possible without a snowball-like investment of real world money you will probably loose them.
3. The added value of the subscription should be meaningfull and not simply outbuyable from the respective store and on the other hand the store should be evean for the subsribing players hold interresting stuff they might want to own at reasonble price. No SUPER items should be sold in stores as this will start the snowwball roling :)
Finally:
From my superficial look at the official DDO site i think there are some interresting ideas to combine the two pament styles in to a coherent whole, for example ehanced user support/vip membership i have not seen so far.
BUT if this really works has to be shown and is mainly dependent on some complex balancing and added value marketing tasks.
I'm playing closed beta, so I won't be able to answer till NDA is lifted, I'm afraid
.
I'm playing closed beta, so I won't be able to answer till NDA is lifted, I'm afraid
.
Closed beta for an old game? So they have testers testing their new payment systems? Everything has been around for years. Doesn't sound like there is anything exciting to find out.
Closed beta for an old game? So they have testers testing their new payment systems? Everything has been around for years. Doesn't sound like there is anything exciting to find out.
It's not an old game
. It's very experienced and carefully developed "unique D&D style" game, absolutely. It's not DDO: Stormereach, but DDO: Eberron Unlimited, a relaunch and that's going to make a difference. I mean, if you read the press about it already, you may get such impression (I'm not allowed to say anything else).
And beta is a great opportunity to make it much better, as all betas are meant for extensive development. No, it's not just "to test the store", as you can find out too if you delve deeper into it.
If you think it's going to go quiet and without broader notice, remember again that it's a closed beta under NDA. But it's no secret (press release) that Turbine invited thousands of people for this beta to date, and even first week was an unprecedented record of applies for beta / new subs for live game servers (old game).
I like the idea that games ppl play on computer(MMORPG i am mentioning) becoming free..In the real world one would never pay to play a game of tennise or football... But we do put in an initial amount to buy the ball or racket.
So the question is NOT when F2P model or P2P model wil work!
But rather when does F2P come of age to take over 80-100% market share. That depends on the production houses also. But as gaming is a business unlike a game of foot ball in backyard... There wil alaways be market for both...
Westren players wil tend to go to P2P more than asian players(like me):P
I don't know where some of you guys are coming from but you're giving some odd examples. You're not looking at micromanagement as a game developer. If I was F2P game dev I would be interested for players who have money to buy items from my mall. It would allow me to support the game, since I would have money and it would also introduce items from Item Mall into the market. Spending limits would keep in game market from flooding with the item mall items and my account would always have constant income which would make me able to work on the game and make it more fun for players.
Another question if people with money would have advantage. PEOPLE WITH MONEY ALWAYS HAVE ADVANTAGE. No matter how you look at it. Its that simple.
If someone has money to spend in F2P game and get for example higher enchanted armor - similar situation is for people who don't have money to spend but they have time to play the game. I play the game for example for 2 hours a day and refine my armor to +8, the Bob plays the game 10 hours a day and he has enough money from grinding to refine his armor to +8 as well. He just needs to find a person who sells refining charms from the mall. Its just a small example of the balance between time and money.