In an interview with Chinese site 17173.com, SOE's John Smedley shared some revealing details about PlanetSide 2, including the fact that the upcoming MMO shooter will be free.
MMOsite carried the English version of the story early this morning, but there were a few points that were lost in translation. So we contacted Smedley for clarification, and he said that while he had previously mentioned that the game will be "some form of free-to-play," SOE is not prepared to announce specifics just yet, but we should "expect something that will be very player friendly." He mentioned that a Blizzard-style auction house won't be a part of that plan but that he was fond of what League of Legends had done with its system.
It's also his opinion that Star Wars: The Old Republic will be the last large-scale MMO with a subscription fee. "The game looks great," Smedley commented, "and I will be playing myself. BioWare is doing an awesome job."
Smedley also made mention of PlanetSide 2's beta schedule. SOE is aiming to begin wider testing of the title later this year or early next year in North America, but the company doesn't know for sure just yet.
PlanetSide 2 is aiming to be bigger and better than the original, with battlefields holding up to 2,000 players at the same time, a flexible skill system that allows players to fine-tune their troops and engage in crafting, and a struggle to control territory between three factions. Interestingly enough, Smedley said that the factions might not always be at each other's throats; the PlanetSide 2 team has plans to launch PvE world events such as alien invasions where all players will put aside their differences to combat a shared threat.
Reader Comments (46)
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:06PM BigAndShiny said
And yet if EQ Next is F2P, i doubt many eq fans will enjoy it. I agree with SWTOR being the last 'dinosaur' MMO, but whether it will sink like the Titanic/Crash like the Hindenburg or age gracefully with big but slowly fading subscriber numbers it remains to be seen.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:08PM ImperialPanda said
A F2P model makes more money than P2P, it's just that simple. Especially now that more high production games are actually designed from the start to support a F2P payment model. (despite that term being an oxymoron)
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:57PM ImperialPanda said
@Pingles
Farmville makes something like 4 times as much money as WoW makes.
Reply
Farmville makes something like 4 times as much money as WoW makes.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 2:10PM bobfish said
@ImperialPanda
Not true.
Hybrid MMOs make the most money per user.
Subscription MMOs are second and free to play MMOs are third. Given there is only one buy to play MMO out there, it is hard to determine where that particular business model will fall.
I suspect that we'll see P2, EQ Next and most big budget MMOs going forward launching as hybrid, with a free to play element, item shop and optional subscription. Like LOTRO, CO, EQ2X, AoC, etc.
SWTOR probably is the last big subscription only MMO from western companies, obviously we have TERA, ArcheAge and Blade & Soul from South Korea still to come, but other than that... most titles are either completely free to play (Neverwinter) or hybrid (TSW).
Reply
Not true.
Hybrid MMOs make the most money per user.
Subscription MMOs are second and free to play MMOs are third. Given there is only one buy to play MMO out there, it is hard to determine where that particular business model will fall.
I suspect that we'll see P2, EQ Next and most big budget MMOs going forward launching as hybrid, with a free to play element, item shop and optional subscription. Like LOTRO, CO, EQ2X, AoC, etc.
SWTOR probably is the last big subscription only MMO from western companies, obviously we have TERA, ArcheAge and Blade & Soul from South Korea still to come, but other than that... most titles are either completely free to play (Neverwinter) or hybrid (TSW).
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 2:14PM ImperialPanda said
@bobfish
I consider "hybrid" mmos the same as F2P. You can still play for free, and paying for a subscription is just the same as paying for anything else in a cash shop.
Reply
I consider "hybrid" mmos the same as F2P. You can still play for free, and paying for a subscription is just the same as paying for anything else in a cash shop.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 3:19PM (Unverified) said
@ImperialPanda So you agree that WoW is F2P then since it has a cash shop.
Reply
Posted: Sep 9th 2011 11:07AM ImperialPanda said
@(Unverified)
You can't play all of WoW's levels and dungeons without subscription. How does that make it F2P?
But initially WoW had no cash shop whatsoever. And no unlimited free trial. Clearly they are trying to shift gears to incorporate more microtransactions. Because, again, it is obvious to everyone that F2P makes more money.
Reply
You can't play all of WoW's levels and dungeons without subscription. How does that make it F2P?
But initially WoW had no cash shop whatsoever. And no unlimited free trial. Clearly they are trying to shift gears to incorporate more microtransactions. Because, again, it is obvious to everyone that F2P makes more money.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:09PM aaradun said
i loved first planetside if it's anything like first one but bigger + better + free then i'll be very very happy
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:14PM Fabius Bile said
yet another promising MMO that its publishers are hellbent on ruining with their insatiable greed...
my list of must-play is getting shorter by the day...
its a shame, I was willing to give this game a go, but Im not rich enough to afford free to play games...
my list of must-play is getting shorter by the day...
its a shame, I was willing to give this game a go, but Im not rich enough to afford free to play games...
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:31PM Yellowdancer said
@Fabius Bile
I play EQ2 and I spent $10. You are doing something wrong, I think.
Reply
I play EQ2 and I spent $10. You are doing something wrong, I think.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:43PM SocksForYou said
@Fabius Bile
It all depends which model they use. If you have to "rent" weapons or regularly buy cash shop consumables to be competitive, then I'll likely pass.
I'm playing Age of Empires Online right now and I don't think I'll ever have to pay more than my initial $20 investment to get many, many hours of enjoyment out of the game. Not all F2P models are bad.
Reply
It all depends which model they use. If you have to "rent" weapons or regularly buy cash shop consumables to be competitive, then I'll likely pass.
I'm playing Age of Empires Online right now and I don't think I'll ever have to pay more than my initial $20 investment to get many, many hours of enjoyment out of the game. Not all F2P models are bad.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:46PM BigAndShiny said
@Yellowdancer
Yes but If I want the coolest clothes or the best weapons or awesome pets i can EARN IT in a P2P game. In F2P i have to fork out ridiculous prices that the devs know collectors will pat.
Reply
Yes but If I want the coolest clothes or the best weapons or awesome pets i can EARN IT in a P2P game. In F2P i have to fork out ridiculous prices that the devs know collectors will pat.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:51PM Fabius Bile said
@Yellowdancer
EQ2 = PvE game, competition ranges from laugthable to nonexistant
PS2 = purely PvP game, competition is the be all end all
cash shop = teh balance ruiner
say what you want, I dont want to play a game just to be oneshotted all the time by those who spend $50 in overpowered guns and another $100 in mods to make them even more OP.
thank you but no thank you, I'll stick to the good old P2P games.
You are free to be stuck with PvE only games, or with being the punching ball of those who pay for advantages in PvP games.
Reply
EQ2 = PvE game, competition ranges from laugthable to nonexistant
PS2 = purely PvP game, competition is the be all end all
cash shop = teh balance ruiner
say what you want, I dont want to play a game just to be oneshotted all the time by those who spend $50 in overpowered guns and another $100 in mods to make them even more OP.
thank you but no thank you, I'll stick to the good old P2P games.
You are free to be stuck with PvE only games, or with being the punching ball of those who pay for advantages in PvP games.
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 1:57PM Pingles said
@BigAndShiny
If you want the coolest stuff you have a choice. Either devote tons of time in a P2P or money in an F2P.
The difference?
If you don't need that fancy stuff you can play the F2P for free. The only F2Ps I've given money to was voluntary to support them. One I didnt even buy anything (Zentia).
Reply
If you want the coolest stuff you have a choice. Either devote tons of time in a P2P or money in an F2P.
The difference?
If you don't need that fancy stuff you can play the F2P for free. The only F2Ps I've given money to was voluntary to support them. One I didnt even buy anything (Zentia).
Posted: Sep 8th 2011 2:15PM Fabius Bile said
@Pingles
actually the difference is that in a P2P game the fancy stuff is there for all to get, in a F2P is only for those with more money than common sense.
and again,the problem isnt the "fancy" stuff.
There comes a point in pretty much al thel F2P games, where the cash shop stuff is no more convenient, fancy or cool, but necessary and dangerously close to mandatory.
freeloaders are fine with leaving the game and hopping to the next one when they reach that point... or maybe they arent fine and they cry about it.
the outcome is the same anyway, they leave because they cannot possibly keep up.
Thats how F2P games keep afloat, "hinting" their players that they have to start paying more and more, and getting rid of the dead weight that rejects to do so.
some of us are not fine with leaving the game, and are not fine with paying outrageous amounts of money for something that not long ago was included in the game.
thats why we cringe in pain every time a pontentially decent game goes to F2P.
and we cringe even louder when a mouth breather comes here and says F2P is awesome, because the idiot thinks that when companies go F2P its out of kindness, that its better for the player...
Reply
actually the difference is that in a P2P game the fancy stuff is there for all to get, in a F2P is only for those with more money than common sense.
and again,the problem isnt the "fancy" stuff.
There comes a point in pretty much al thel F2P games, where the cash shop stuff is no more convenient, fancy or cool, but necessary and dangerously close to mandatory.
freeloaders are fine with leaving the game and hopping to the next one when they reach that point... or maybe they arent fine and they cry about it.
the outcome is the same anyway, they leave because they cannot possibly keep up.
Thats how F2P games keep afloat, "hinting" their players that they have to start paying more and more, and getting rid of the dead weight that rejects to do so.
some of us are not fine with leaving the game, and are not fine with paying outrageous amounts of money for something that not long ago was included in the game.
thats why we cringe in pain every time a pontentially decent game goes to F2P.
and we cringe even louder when a mouth breather comes here and says F2P is awesome, because the idiot thinks that when companies go F2P its out of kindness, that its better for the player...
Featured Stories
Not So Massively: Dreamhack 2013, news from E3, and Path of Exile battles RMT
Posted on Jun 17th 2013 8:00PM









