Conquering the world just got a lot more affordable, as Trion Worlds announced that its MMORTS End of Nations will be released as a top-notch free-to-play title. This decision means that players can not only obtain a copy of the client for free, but play through the solo, co-op, and the persistent-world multiplayer conquest modes as well.
Trion's Dave Luehmann hopes this will give End of Nations a competitive advantage when it launches: "Being able to offer a premium game such as End of Nations for free sets us apart in this industry. At Trion, we strive to innovate online gaming while emphasizing the delivery of the best core gameplay experience available. Our decision to release End of Nations as a AAA free–to-play title is guided by these principles."
Trion will be offering an optional subscription package and a game store to enhance players' experience. The store will sell customization and convenience items, and Trion has clearly stated that it will not be selling "pay-to-win items" through it.
During our hands-on impressions from last year, we noted that the title was probably not best suited for a monthly subscription, so it's good to see Trion freeing the game from that business model. End of Nations will be available to players at this month's Gamescom.
Reader Comments (36)
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:15PM doublerainbow said
This is absolutely great news! I can't wait to see what these Ex-WestWood employees put together.
I might stick with the sub option to get the most out of the game. I can imagine if you pay to play you might get more options in all aspects of the game.
I just hope the campaign is just as fun as online matches look to be.
I might stick with the sub option to get the most out of the game. I can imagine if you pay to play you might get more options in all aspects of the game.
I just hope the campaign is just as fun as online matches look to be.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:24PM SnarlingWolf said
This is awful news.
They aren't going to make money off of customization/appearance only on an RTS. They may foolishly think that they can make it work, but they will quickly find they aren't pulling in enough money that way to pay the bills.
That means they are going to make it off of units/advantages. Which means the game will be pay to win in the truest form of the term. Even if they don't know/admit it yet.
They aren't going to make money off of customization/appearance only on an RTS. They may foolishly think that they can make it work, but they will quickly find they aren't pulling in enough money that way to pay the bills.
That means they are going to make it off of units/advantages. Which means the game will be pay to win in the truest form of the term. Even if they don't know/admit it yet.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:36PM Dril said
@SnarlingWolf
Absolutely agree.
In most RTSs, being able to see that wicked, awesome skull vinyl on my tanks is largely impossible due to zooming out, and I doubt many people really give a crap about stuff like that anyway (since, as opposed to MMOs, you have multiple, samey units.)
Battleforge showed that a F2P RTS doesn't really work all that well.
And Battleforge was actually a pretty good game (if somewhat annoying since it lacked my beloved base building.)
Reply
Absolutely agree.
In most RTSs, being able to see that wicked, awesome skull vinyl on my tanks is largely impossible due to zooming out, and I doubt many people really give a crap about stuff like that anyway (since, as opposed to MMOs, you have multiple, samey units.)
Battleforge showed that a F2P RTS doesn't really work all that well.
And Battleforge was actually a pretty good game (if somewhat annoying since it lacked my beloved base building.)
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:39PM doublerainbow said
@SnarlingWolf
From all the evidence in the industry, combining a F2P and Sub hybrid option is the sure way to go. It seems to always boost interest and income for the company involved.
I think this move means they are aiming for long term sustainability, rather then hope to get all your money and wait til the game dies down to go F2P.
I think their move is the best and most aggressive one. I would bet the F2P option will of course mean less options as I said earlier however.
Reply
From all the evidence in the industry, combining a F2P and Sub hybrid option is the sure way to go. It seems to always boost interest and income for the company involved.
I think this move means they are aiming for long term sustainability, rather then hope to get all your money and wait til the game dies down to go F2P.
I think their move is the best and most aggressive one. I would bet the F2P option will of course mean less options as I said earlier however.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:46PM SnarlingWolf said
@SnarlingWolf
It is humorous what Trion fans down rate.
There was nothing offensive in my post, but fan boys of Trion can't let anyone speak the truth. That would be awful.
Reply
It is humorous what Trion fans down rate.
There was nothing offensive in my post, but fan boys of Trion can't let anyone speak the truth. That would be awful.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:43PM (Unverified) said
So not interested now.
This free 2 play movement is nothing but trouble in the long run. It means poor quality, slow development, and pay to win transaction. It's money pit for developers, if the project tanks, they take a major lose, hurting the company. F2P is not profitible in the NA market, only the Korean market currently.
This free 2 play movement is nothing but trouble in the long run. It means poor quality, slow development, and pay to win transaction. It's money pit for developers, if the project tanks, they take a major lose, hurting the company. F2P is not profitible in the NA market, only the Korean market currently.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:51PM real65rcncom said
@(Unverified):
aoc just got 300k new subs and doubled revenue. Lotro and DDO did just as good or better.
are you not using facts here or just opinion?
besides, how else does Trion pay for three games without putting a cashshop in two of them?
Reply
aoc just got 300k new subs and doubled revenue. Lotro and DDO did just as good or better.
are you not using facts here or just opinion?
besides, how else does Trion pay for three games without putting a cashshop in two of them?
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 1:09PM Super Nerd said
@real65rcncom
Make anything free and more people play it. Doesn't make it good. In my opinion this "F2P Craze" has done nothing but ruin some of my favorite IPs, because companies know they can make more money creating sub-par games and adding a cash shop to them.
Reply
Make anything free and more people play it. Doesn't make it good. In my opinion this "F2P Craze" has done nothing but ruin some of my favorite IPs, because companies know they can make more money creating sub-par games and adding a cash shop to them.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 2:28PM eLdritchZ said
@(Unverified) Then why are LotrO, DDO, AoC, LoL and WoT doing so well?
I believe LoL is actually the best comparison since they are both sort of RTS games... LoL makes a shit tonne of money selling skins for the champions... it doesn't make a big difference in game and the models are rather tiny, still people buy a lot of them and Riot is doing very well selling nothing but customization and convenience... I believe it's the better choice for an MMORTS... for an RPG I prefer P2P tbh but something like EoN... I would rather like to play it a bit first and then decide if it's worth the premium money...
Reply
I believe LoL is actually the best comparison since they are both sort of RTS games... LoL makes a shit tonne of money selling skins for the champions... it doesn't make a big difference in game and the models are rather tiny, still people buy a lot of them and Riot is doing very well selling nothing but customization and convenience... I believe it's the better choice for an MMORTS... for an RPG I prefer P2P tbh but something like EoN... I would rather like to play it a bit first and then decide if it's worth the premium money...
Posted: Aug 12th 2011 12:57AM Graill said
@real65rcncom
You need to get your facts straight first off, all had spikes, all dropped back down. F2P is misbrand and its sole intention is to make money, not let you play free. You can request financial info and numbers from those you listed directly since all have white papers on investor reports, no the hype spinners that say the water is flowing after just having turned the faucet on. Do some research before you try to stand up for the companies you just listed. (friendly smile)
Reply
You need to get your facts straight first off, all had spikes, all dropped back down. F2P is misbrand and its sole intention is to make money, not let you play free. You can request financial info and numbers from those you listed directly since all have white papers on investor reports, no the hype spinners that say the water is flowing after just having turned the faucet on. Do some research before you try to stand up for the companies you just listed. (friendly smile)
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:49PM real65rcncom said
Makes sense.
They've got Defiance they still haven't paid for either. RIFT is giving so many discounts that they are only getting like.. $9/month for a sub overall.
You can't run three games on one's budget unless the one is doing gangbusters, and given they've got 40+ servers just sitting there doing nothing.. they aren't doing well projection wise.
SWTOR, GW2, AA.. those games will pull even more subs from RIFT which means less money to put into Defiance and EoN so.. f2p is the right play here.
They've got Defiance they still haven't paid for either. RIFT is giving so many discounts that they are only getting like.. $9/month for a sub overall.
You can't run three games on one's budget unless the one is doing gangbusters, and given they've got 40+ servers just sitting there doing nothing.. they aren't doing well projection wise.
SWTOR, GW2, AA.. those games will pull even more subs from RIFT which means less money to put into Defiance and EoN so.. f2p is the right play here.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:50PM real65rcncom said
aoc just got 300k new subs and doubled revenue. Lotro and DDO did just as good or better.
are you not using facts here or just opinion?
besides, how else does Trion pay for three games without putting a cashshop in two of them?
are you not using facts here or just opinion?
besides, how else does Trion pay for three games without putting a cashshop in two of them?
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 12:55PM SocksForYou said
How do you know if it's "top notch" when the game hasn't even released yet?
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 3:25PM Bladerunner83 said
@SocksForYou
They are assuming from their most recent game... Rift. And they called Rift a AAA game, so you can work from there.
Reply
They are assuming from their most recent game... Rift. And they called Rift a AAA game, so you can work from there.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 4:36PM SocksForYou said
@Bladerunner83
I think Rift was a great game but a F2P RTS is a bit of a departure from that.
Massively tends to oversell most of the games it covers and I just wish they'd dial it back a little.
Reply
I think Rift was a great game but a F2P RTS is a bit of a departure from that.
Massively tends to oversell most of the games it covers and I just wish they'd dial it back a little.
Posted: Aug 11th 2011 1:06PM (Unverified) said
f2p does indeed mean slow development, if not none. as someone mentioned, f2p will not work well on a strategy game.
nonetheless, looking forward to giving this and AOE a try
nonetheless, looking forward to giving this and AOE a try









