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

Reader Comments (75)

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:11AM Xpander said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
DAoC i belive

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:11AM JoeH42 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
World of Warcrack. People HAVE to keep going around swinging their giant e-peens in front of them so they can try to ignore what losers they are IRL. Not that everyone who plays WoW is that way, but I think it's their core audience and it's definately what they're relying on.

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 11:09AM HereticalPenguin said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@JoeH42 WoW survives because it's a solid fun game. Don't be smug about it.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 12:53PM Azules said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@HereticalPenguin He was more commenting on the horrible core community. He's got a point.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 4:52PM Keeop said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
@JoeH42 solid game, awful community, and those e-peens are actually pretty tiny :) they're being swung with great vigor, though.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 6:39PM JoeH42 said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@JoeH42 World of Warcraft is a great game, it's the community and Blizzard's complete lack of customer service that makes it unplayable. And no matter how many fans give me a negative rating for saying it I stand by my statement that it will be last game to ever give up it's subscription because it's core audience is addicted to it. The very fact that people give me a negative rating despite my statement being 100% accurate only proves my point.
Reply

Posted: Sep 10th 2011 12:12PM elliotrock said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@HereticalPenguin

It survives because of its high social dependency (you can't achieve anything alone), massive grind for reward. Yes the game is done well and it is fun to play but so are others.

Ain't called WoWcrack for nothing.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:21AM Fabius Bile said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
the F2P model will succumb before the last P2P closes down.

Its just a matter of time that those players willing to spend money realizethe F2P games are worse for them. lower quality, being nickle and dimedfor anything and everything, pay to win items

they will leave that games with only the freeriders playing them. at that point those companies will go bankrupt since the ponzi scheme cannot hold up any longer.

after that, companies will run away from the f2p model and back to the p2p

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:25AM xBludx said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile

I hope/wish this is true.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 9:34AM DarkWalker said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile

The F2P model is here to stay.

It didn't start (or is at it's strongest) in the MMO space. Instead, it has shown it's true strength in the social, browser gaming segment, and as of October 2010 has made Zinga's market value greater than EA's.

Besides, it's incredibly successful in the Asian market.

F2P works, so it will not die in the western MMO market. And even if it died, it would come back from Asia and from the social gaming market, where P2P is mostly dead anyway.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 11:10AM SnarlingWolf said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile

This is correct and there will be new P2P games and there will be old P2P games that keep chugging along.

We haven't seen the longevity of F2P titles yet, but we have seen that P2P games have lasted for over a decade and are still going.

To think all P2P is going away is, well, a little crazy.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 2:55PM Fabius Bile said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@DarkWalker

take a look at the current wave of asian F2P games published in west. few of them have been here for more than 2 years. a lot of them close each month.

F2P works in Asia because the companies plan for it.

That means, they create games worth practically nothing, put extremly disrruptive cash shops, market them big and ride the newness for a while.

At that point the game is basically dead but they prolly made profits, so they close it without remorse and launch another one.


Here its different, because people isnt willing to play $100k generic craps. people expects game like SWToR. Thats why that generic asian craps that work so well in asia did bad here.

F2P has never been seen as a viable alternative to P2P in west till a couple years ago

why is F2P blooming lately in west then?


Because some failed P2P games moved to F2P.

even being failures, they were up to several million times better than your average asian born-to-be-F2P. So people were willing to give them a go.
The western market was practically empty of quality F2P games, so the first titles to pioneer the model claimed an unexplored territory.

the catch?
unlike the P2P sector, the F2P sector can only expand so much.

a P2P game with few players is gaining few money, but since every active player is an active payer, the costs for the company scalate with the playerbase. if the initial investment was already recovered...well, few money is better than no money, so they can go on forever.

Thats why you can see plenty P2P games that have been operating for well over 5, 6 or even 10 years, even tho their current playerbases are at a minimum.

a F2P game with many players but few payers is essentially costing the company money, since they have to offer a service (servers, content, bandwith, cusomer service) to all that people, when 95% are basically leeching it.

as more and more games turn to F2P, the market will saturate.
players will have more alternatives to play. and games will have to start figthing for their attention.

At that point, game publishers have 2 alternatives

a) monetize the game more. create new , more powerful cash shop items that people feel they have to own to keep playing, trying to increase the sales.

Its bound to fail because people will always go to the game that they percieve to be more fair (aka cheap or free)

b) cut on the spendings to stay afloat longer. less GMs,worse/outdated servers, games of lower budget with lower quality, less updates and content.

thats exactly where we were not long ago, with low quality games/services that didnt work in west. P2P games with more quality ate them alive and gathered the majority of the playerbase.



basically, the F2P model is self destructive, the more it grows the faster its killing itself. its a ponzi scheme.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 5:58PM blackcat7k said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile

I agree with a lot of what FB says here. I don't agree that it will die , but I do hope it will be lessened in the coming years. F2P doesn't equate to the spirit of what makes a game.

To make a game players need to be on an equal footing starting out in the same arena. With F2P you have different players at different starting points based on the cash they paid. This doesn't equal a game, it's something else.

Maybe F2P should stop marketing their products as "games" and come up with an all new classification.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 6:42PM JoeH42 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile Some F2P games aren't very good, but quite a few of them are great games. It's foolish to make sweeping judgements based on how a company makes it's profits from a game.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:03PM Fabius Bile said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@JoeH42
read what I posted. the quality of the game is irrelevant, the flaw lies in the business model itself.

the F2P model works NOW because it was mostly a virgin land with room fo those daring to step in , and companies havent really started to fight between themselves to get a share of the market. So far every game that has switched to F2P has seen its playerbase grow.

At some point that has to change, the more F2P games appear, the cruder they will have to fight for the limited market.

the P2P business model is more suited for this kind of competition between games.

in a F2P model, if the game is very good it will attract hordes of players willing to play it...just not to pay a dime.

Then the company is figthing an uphill battle.

Running the game as it is, is leading them to bankruptcy, the costs exceed the income.

If they start selling cash shop items that the playerbase cannot ignore, the balance is broken and people will leave it.

If they start cheaping, the game stops being good, and either other new F2P or a P2P game will appear. and people will leave it aswell for them.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 9:18PM Zenn said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile

The main issue with F2P is more that companies aren't getting their cash shop rights causing the game to fail (Allods Online during initial launch), and less that the actual game is bad as the genre has been growing
Reply

Posted: Sep 9th 2011 4:31AM blessedswine said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Fabius Bile i agree the F2P games like Champions online and Conan arent really F2P at thier core, they were made to Be tripple A titles in the MMO market and only converted to F2P cause if they didnt they would fail and not make thier money back...i dont mind cash shops in P2P games as long as they are just items that make you look better but dont offer any real advantage. i could be wrong but the Everquest 2 live version does this, they have a market place to buy items to change the way your armor looks but it doesnt make it better stat wise, im fine with that. If you want to spend your money to make your character look more unique then go for it. but i hate Pay 2 Win that shit pisses me off.
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:22AM Thecool444 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Star wars galaxies.

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 7:28PM Bramen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Thecool444
Good one!
Reply

Posted: Sep 8th 2011 8:23AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I would stop playing MOO's if they all went to a cash shop format. Just my opinion. I am OK with a free to play game up to level 20 or a trial period of some sort, but that's about it.

Subscriptions help keep the riffraff out >.> Yes I am looking @ you!!!! You know who you are you abomination! :D

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

Joystiq

Joystiq

WoW Insider

WoW

TUAW

TUAW