Gaming Industry shifts more to F2P. Will TOR follow?

[AfroZ]

 

SWTOR is dying a quick death due to endless hutball matches and no lfg tool.

 

You were doing so well. Then you wrote that. Tsk. A shame really.

[Dkzero]

You were doing so well. Then you wrote that. Tsk. A shame really.

 

It's the truth.

[Aussiedroid]

F2P I think is an admission of failure to capture paying customers.

 

I would argue that most F2P would not make more than subscription based, although I am sure there are exceptions.

 

From my view, most F2P games I have played have had limited appeal. I have tried a lot from the Steam F2P and a few outside but generally only get a few hours of entertainment then I stop.

 

If big players like SWTOR or WOW went F2P I think they would be loosing revenue rather than gaining it. It would look good on the stats side as many more subs would result but long term it rarely keeps people playing.

 

F2P can have its place, dont get me wrong, but for SWTOR .. No.

[Daysup]

I believe all MMOs will go F2P (or buy the box only, online is free with cash shop etc), once blizzard does it main stream. Which will probably when Titan is released. They'll will probably keep Wow Sub-based forever though, since it's a title that can probably do it.

 

 

Blizzard has been gearing up for F2P, they already a cash stop/service which they developed for WoW, you know, paided mounts and pets, account services.

Now with Diablo 3, they're designing and testing out the Real Money Auction house to eliminate any third party auction sites as well as cash in on all those transactions.

 

I believe Titan will have all of the above. Buy the box, free online world to play in, as well as real money auction house/web services/account services, cash stop.

 

 

once they do it, everyone will have to follow suit.

[ounkeo]

Has Warhammer Online gone to F2P yet? Arguably one of the worst launched MMO of our generation behind only Asheron's Call 2.

 

Has it gone F2P yet? If not then why would TOR ever go F2P... one of the most successful launches in gaming history (think subscriberships not bugs or people who are or going to quit)

 

I'm asking a serious question because i don't know. I would like to play Warhammer Online again... heard is was good now but don't want to pay $16 a month

 

Since I am still paying for my 7 WOW accounts plus 1 SWTOR account.

 

Warhammer is not even close to being the worst launched mmorpg. It had its problems as all launch games do. The biggest launch issue that really trully affected people were server imbalances with many more people playing Destruction and severely outnumbering Order side and ridiculous power level scaliing as they added more content and patches in.

 

 

To see what was the worst mmorpg launch of all time, check out Vanguard Saga of Heroes. By any standards, and I am quite lenient, Vanguard blew chunks the first 1.5 years it was up.

 

As to the OP, SWTOR will NOT go F2P. Not all games do and it doesn't always make sense to. I simply don't think the IP holders will let them (seen as devaluing the brand) just as I am pretty sure that is why Warhammer hasn't gone F2P yet - instead, they went and created an offshoot (Wrath of Heroes) that *is* F2p.

[ounkeo]

Curious as to how F2P is popular, I know I won't bother paying for it if it's free. If its a P2W model I'll play till I can't do any more with what is given and I'll leave. I will not pay to be successful in a video game.

 

Then again, I'm one of those that are happy with 'monthly subscription/what you see is what you get' payment plans, and I'm not one of these tools who download countless ringtones apps and games for their phone that get added to the monthly bill either. But there seems to be alot of em so I guess it would be popular, if only among the countless tools that populate the Earth.

 

Have you tried LOTRO F2P model yet?

 

There are limitations that are unlocked by paying, but they also allow you to accumulate in game currency from just playing and you can use that to purchase the unlocks, zone unlocks etc. But by in large, i think where they make their most money is from convenient items and vanity items and costume sets.

 

The system caters to the ultra-cheapskate where even if you really don't want to pay, you can go through the game and even buy expansions with the points you accrue. It's a pretty good system.

 

For people (myself included) who don't like the psychological effect of being locked out of things - even if I haven't yet reached that point, I bought a lifetime membership $199 which allows me access to absolutely everything and I get a monthly lump sum that I can use for anything in the shop. It's pretty signifigant.

 

I've bought all the expacs, many vanity items, stat tomes and skill reset scrolls with the free bundle I receive. Also, I ended up paying a ton of real money on ... more vanity items. go figure.

 

Some systems are pretty mercenary but LOTRO's system is actually pretty good.

[GnatB]

you're completely wrong. People will want a lot of options without having to pay for them. That will mean a lot of free to play games. Then if you like the game you can then start to invest more money for more access to that game, that is micro-transaction.

 

You're misunderstanding. What I'm saying is eventually all computer applications will be run on mainframe type computers somewhere, with the output/input streaming from/to the video/input device of your choice. Whether that's some handheld "phone" screen, or some 50" T.V. type screen with joypad, or some more modest desktop screen w/ keyboard/mouse. Through some subscription based service basically like OnLive. (which may or may not simply be part of your ISP's services) Games (or other apps) will get a cut of your subscription fees. Now, possibly some will be "premium" that you have to pay additional for, but that doesn't negate the fact that you'll be paying a subscription to access all the rest.

[Vlaxitov]

F2P, isn't that the universal code for "we're desperate and need to draw in new players"?

 

What I've quoted is what online game devs would like you to think.

 

In reality, F2P is actually codeword for "we've given up on our game making as much money as we would have liked on subscriptions alone and its already in an irreversible decline, so we might as well tax what players we have on their way out."

 

It really has nothing to do with drawing new players and everything to do with an excuse to add a cash shop to start charging more as "F2P" than they did with a subscription to play the same game.

 

When any online game like this goes "F2P," its time to get out.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Vlaxitov

[Citywok]

F2P used to be P2AccessContent. It is shifting away from that.

 

Look at the model used by STO (Star Trek Online.) The game has gone F2P. You can buy new ships, trinkets, and even "Required" stuff in the Cryptic Store. However, they introduced a new in-game currency as well. This in-game currency can NOT be purchased in the real-money store, only achieved through CONTENT in game. It can, however, be sold in-game to players for credit in the real-money store, granting full access to the items in the real-money store for F2P players.

 

There is a healthy trade of real-money store credit and in-game currency.

 

The game's subscriber base has increased drastically since going to this F2P model, and the game is making bank. They continue to churn out new content on a regular basis using this model, and while the content isn't stellar (which IMO is why the game failed the P2P model), it is is very... Star Trek-ey.

 

So how do they make their money? People are lazy, and they bank on it. People don't want to do the leg work to get what they want, or they just have that much dispensable income and don't care, so they pay. Meanwhile a minority of the player base is able to enjoy the game at the longer, more drawn out pace and level progression to get the in-game currency and only buy what they need with real-money credit in the Cryptic Store.

 

Seems to work.

 

Will Bioware ever make the shift to F2P? Never say never, when it comes to an MMO, but not as long as they will make more money P2P. Keep in mind, what works in Asia, doesn't work in the US always. There is a cultural mentality against F2P that requires balancing, like in STO. In Asia, there isn't so much (IIRC, even most phones and net connections are pay-per-minute, or they used to be a few years ago - someone please correct me if I am wrong.)

 

But guess what? STO SUCKS. There is a reason it went F2P and it's still going to fail with the next 2 or 3 years. FAILURES go F2P. SWTOR, a game with over a million subs, is not going F2P. Ever.

[AislingKerrigan]

No. Big budget MMOs like WoW & TOR are the REASON games are going F2P. People won't pay monthly for a game that doesn't have the same quality as bigger budget games.

[Halofax]

If SWTOR goes F2P its because it sucks and no one wants to play...

 

But..

 

GW2 launches F2P... and somehow it will kill WoW...

 

Hmmm

[dnomz]

http://www.swtor.com/server-status

 

Yes it will go F2P. Only one heavy populated server at almost 7 PM CST (6 PM GMT) and that's what I would call a peak.

[Vlaxitov]

Have you tried LOTRO F2P model yet?

 

I've bought all the expacs, many vanity items, stat tomes and skill reset scrolls with the free bundle I receive. Also, I ended up paying a ton of real money on ... more vanity items. go figure.

 

Some systems are pretty mercenary but LOTRO's system is actually pretty good.

 

LOTRO's system is the greediest I've seen. They offer things like bag space, travel cost & speed, permenant stats like datacrons, and most importantly a way around the RNG system with legendary weapons all at an additional real money cost.

 

I can play games alot for long hours and I would have never been able to gather up enough turbine points to buy the expansions on straight F2P. With a lifetime sub you get a monthly stipend of turbine points yet turbine found another way into your wallet by your own admission, brilliant!

 

This is exactly what I'm talking about. "F2P" isn't trying to get new subs, its taxing the subs they already have.

[dnomz]

No. Big budget MMOs like WoW & TOR are the REASON games are going F2P. People won't pay monthly for a game that doesn't have the same quality as bigger budget games.

 

Umm what? WoW has killed the other games, TOR hasn't killed anything. And never will.

 

You speak of quality, TOR has much less to offer than WoW. Why even name them in one sentence?

 

WoW is here, on top of the mountain

 

 

 

 

All others are here, including TOR.

 

TOR is nothing special. It's just WoW in a SW theme with a poor engine that can't handle mass PvP.

[mangarrage]

I would like any piece of proof that gaming is shifting. What FTP game has 10 million people playing it?

Hell what ftp game has over 2 million. idk I'm asking RoM?

 

He did talk about having the option, which imo should happen. Whereas you could pay a monthly sub and have full access or play free and pay for access.

 

And in that specific instance it really isnt ftp anyway

[Ushev]

I hope not, at least not for a good few years down the road.

[Daluu]

If TOR goes F2P then its dead in the water. Look at how much money is being thrown at it right now and its still in really bad shape.

[Darka]

For me I feel its not so much whether F2P is profitable or not, F2P for many people means "this game isnt good" or "failure" Its a certain stigma that hasnt been helped by games that have done this, and I see still it doing more harm them help

 

They say MT based games are our future, but the Western market isnt ready just yet for it.

[Qandor]

I have a nearly foolproof method of analyzing the long term viability of MMO trends.

 

All I do is look to SOE. SOE, a company who has not made a good decision in 10 years, is touting the fact that F2P is the wave of the future. Obviously this has to be wrong.

 

Since the most popular and profitable MMO of all times is P2P and has been for 8 years, I think it is safe to say that a subscription based model remains very viable indeed well into the future.

 

FTP is for also rans, failing games, and games produced on a shoestring.

[daftshadow]

May be they should hire those folks over at Turbine for consultation on how to make an MMO that was once only paid subscription, transitioned it over to a hybrid business model of subscription & F2P and make the game even more successful financially then ever before and still going strong. Age of Conan also made a similar transition and it seems they're doing fine. Aion I believe already made a similar transition as well for its Europe market, and the North American customers will get it this month.

 

But first I think this game's subscription fee should be lowered a bit. Instead of $14.99/month, make it $9.99. I think with a lower subscription fee, more people will be willing to subscribe to the game and may be hang on to it a while longer to see new changes, content, and features added into the game.

[Knockerz]

It's only profitable cause people are stupid and don't know simple accounting. If I were to play any f2p game I would set a limit of 15 dollars each month just like this game. People assume a game if free to play, but from what I been reading most people end up paying more than normal subscription based game.

 

I wouldn't be oppose to a F2P model that removed the cash shop, but charged for content patches at timely fashion each month or every couple months. Perhaps a hybrid subscription and ft2 model. For example, charge 5 dollars, but charge for content patches. The reason why I would like this because it forces the game company to come out with acceptable content that can be sold to their customers.

 

That's one reason I left wow. Blizzard said when the cataclysm was in beta that water zone raid would be include, but decided to not include it in the expansion, which I felt cheated. Had it been a f2p that I describe sure they can not include that raid, but they won't get any money either.

Edited March 8, 2012 by Knockerz

[ThiborF]

Great discussion. The example I would like to share is Valve and TF2. Team Fortress 2 is "purchase the game, play online for free." From a consumer standpoint, the only other thing that would be better is free game free online play. Realistically, though, we all know it doesn't really work that way.

 

I think Valve puts out quality games, and they support and actually care about the community (of course one could argue, however, that this could, and often does, change over time).

 

When Valve opened up their store, I spent a good $150 on hats and other digital trinkets. I also bought a lot of games that were 70+% off. I didn't have to.

 

Point is, I personally respected Valve because they make good stuff, and it is a great value to me, as the consumer. I honestly wanted to support their company. I voted with my money, this is the business model I want to see survive.

 

Companies that have products and services that are THAT good will have consumers throwing money at them.

 

And how much new content is Valve creating for TF2?

What is Valve's MMORPG?

 

Yeah, ummm, TF2, and Valve in general, is a bad example for this topic. That would be like saying since Blizzard doesn't charge for access to their CoD servers that WoW should be free too.

 

Simply stated, ongoing developments takes resources. Those resources have costs. Development studios are not a charity. Therefore they need a proven revenue stream to offset the costs of that ongoing development. You can do that with microtransactions for fluff and/or non-fluff items. You can do that with pay for content like DLCs (ie. instead of the Rakghoul content being in patch 1.1 you could DL it for a price like $5 or $10) or more frequent expansions (see old EQ and original GW models), you can do it by selling ad space inside the game (most gamers, unless the game world actually supports the idea of current RL companies existing in, consider it immersion breaking to see a Coke or Nike ad in a place like Stormwind or Coruscant), or that ad space could be something like a scrolling ticker strip located at one side of your screen, OR you can have a subscription.

[origamikitsune]

But guess what? STO SUCKS. There is a reason it went F2P and it's still going to fail with the next 2 or 3 years. FAILURES go F2P. SWTOR, a game with over a million subs, is not going F2P. Ever.

 

Why yes, yes it does suck. And as I said, as long as P2P is more profitable, BW won't go that way. If however, this game dies that death that everyone is saying that it is dying, it might. (Not that I believe it will). Certainly, however, not with over a million subs.

Edited March 9, 2012 by origamikitsune

[fcksjdf]

F2P is actually very profitable. I can see the whole genre going F2P in the future like China does.

 

Games that should've gone F2p and never did:

 

Planetside

EQ1 (guessing this is happening soon)

WoW

Warhammer

Aion

 

Aion is F2P.