| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Joystiq, and more

Reader Comments (25)

Posted: Aug 14th 2010 2:09PM notuba said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I agree with Pingles' last comment, for the record.

Let's look at the differences in a simple way, based on other comments here:
Subscription/P2P = long grind for years to succeed, paying the whole time every month VERSUS microtransactions/F2P = way less grind and you pay when you want/need to succeed.

Of course! It all makes perfect sense. Really it does. If you play a subscription game, the publisher wants you to play for a long time so they can be paid every month and make a profit eventually off of subscribers. If you play a cash shop game, the publisher doesn't care how long you play their game, as long as you buy what you want from the cash shop and they make a profit from impatient greed.

Which one wins in a "Western" English-speaking market? It's a job you pay for versus instant gratification you pay for. How fast do you require success?

In today's era of 10 second attention spans, txt msgng n me 2 ur frnd lst nao plz, I can totally understand the attraction of F2P or microtransaction or cash shop games.

Unfortunately, it appears as if TERA is operating on an old business model that is being replaced by a more modern business model that the short attention spans are crying for.

If the original EverQuest had been a microtransaction game, just think how different player opinions would be here in 2010.

Posted: Aug 14th 2010 2:21PM wondersmith said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
TERA is not a micro-transaction game...yet.

Let's not forget how SOE promised EQ II would not go F2P, then turned around a month later and told us it was going F2P. And how everyone thought LotRO was doing great and would never go F2P, and now it's going F2P.

Once the initial hype dies down and subscription numbers are declining and servers are merging and devs are being laid off, suddenly DDO's 5x revenue boost from going F2P starts looking very attractive.

Posted: Aug 14th 2010 5:31PM Somnicide said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is assuming the game fails. If it succeeds, they wont have this problem.

So basically, they're banking on it being good.
Reply

Posted: Aug 14th 2010 7:14PM wondersmith said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Depends on your definition of fail. Plenty of games follow this course and still make modest profits--just nowhere near what their backers dreamt of. Call me jaded, but I've seen too many shiny new MMOs sell a bazillion copies at launch, only to downsize drastically after the included 30 day subscription ends.
Reply

Posted: Aug 15th 2010 7:43AM SkuzBukit said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
F2P model is no guarantee of success either, just because DDO's design worked extraordinarily well with the F2P model (something mostly attributable to it's highly instanced design) doesn't automatically guarantee success for other AAA titles trying it out.

LoTRO & EQIIextended may yet fall on their faces.


Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW