The Old Republic News - SWTOR F2P Revisited

[The_Grand_Nagus]

A long time ago, an MMO had to save itself by transitioning from a subscription-based format to free-to-play. Other MMOs have made the transition over the years, although not with as much need to retain players as Star Wars: the Old Republic. Since that time, the game experienced a resurgence in population for a while, but things seem to have settled down. It's a good time to revisit how the free-to-play experience stacks up against being preferred or a subscriber.

 

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/367/feature/8149/SWTOR-F2P-Revisited.html/page/1

[ninjonxb]

Anyone that complains that someone who is not putting money into the game (or barely putting money in for preferred) have restrictions compared to people that pay every month are morons.

 

Considering bioware has stated that most of their money from the cartel market is from subs anyways, why the hell would they cater to non subs?

[Bstr]

Repost from what I put on Reddit:

 

Many of the restrictions that BioWare has imposed upon its two non-subscriber tiers are no more usurious than anything I've seen in LotRO, STO, and both EverQuests.

 

The biggest difference between the games was in character generation options and races.

 

I found this to be the same for other games too. DCUO has the same restrictions as SWTOR, but allows all races, but not all weapons or powers (classes.) (It also has a way lower credit cap: I hit the cap by level 10.) Rift has the same restrictions, except everyone has access to all content and it allows all races, but not all Souls (skill trees.) Preferably, I would want access to all classes and skill trees that can change gameplay over more races that change my cosmetics.

 

For everyone complaining that SWTOR's F2P restrictions are too much, compare them to other F2P MMO's and see that they are close to the same. Although, BioWare needs to learn from the others and state that Subs have extra "benefits," not that F2P have "restrictions."

 

I later posted this about the skill trees / power restrictions:

Still, Rift locks 1/9 of its skill trees and DCUO locks half of its classes and 1 weapon from F2P. If SWTOR went DCUO's route, then we would be forced to only play with a certain AC per class; if it went Rift's route, then 1 AC out of every class would be missing a skill tree.

[CosmicKat]

Having been here off and on since shortly after launch, I can say that the ONLY time there was ever a noticeable and sustained increase in players has been since the GSF launch.

 

- Up to the server merges it was the most rapid decline in populations I've ever seen in any MMO, and I've played some way worse than TOR.

 

- F2P stabilized the collapse but any increases in numbers were negligible. Factoring in that many of those new players are paying nothing, and any increase is essentially meaningless.

 

- Other "major" patches and events resulted in minor and short-lived bumps in numbers, as they do in every MMO.

 

They expanded content and made it included with a subscription and got (and seem to have retained) more subscribers. Imagine that. It's almost like they discovered the rules of commerce that have existed since the invention of commerce.

 

The server I play on mostly, Ebon Hawk, has been at least 25% busier since GSF. Here's hoping their Holy Metrics make the connection between treating the customer well and getting/retaining more customers.

[befear]

http://www.mmorpg.com/gamelist.cfm/game/367/feature/8149/SWTOR-F2P-Revisited.html/page/1

 

Your point for posting this?

[DarthTHC]

- F2P stabilized the collapse but any increases in numbers were negligible. Factoring in that many of those new players are paying nothing, and any increase is essentially meaningless.

 

According to information EA shared during the earnings call in the last quarter of 2013, the subscriber numbers at their lowest point were "significantly" below 500,000 and at the time just before the earnings call were "nearly" 500,000.

 

If we call "significantly" 20% and "nearly" 5%, that's an increase of about 75,000 subscribers in the time since the game went F2P. If the trough was closer to 350,000 as some believe and "nearly" is 10%, that's an increase of about 100,000 subscribers.

 

Those numbers represent between $13.5 and $18 million dollars annually.

 

Negligible? Meaningless?

 

I'd love to have 10% of that negligible, meaningless money, please!

[Infernixx]

Your point for posting this?

 

He wanted some attention.

[Zorvan]

Your point for posting this?

 

Because it's a review of SWtoR's F2P system, done by a major gaming website?

 

Anyway, perhaps you all should look closer at the article. He's not saying SWtoR's F2P itself is bad, he's saying the presentation of it is bad, and I agree.

 

If you start a F2P account everything from the xp bar to the big SUBSCRIBE NOW popup to the opening of the website to the purchase page every time you quit the game demands you to pay money to "enjoy" SWtoR. While other F2P games take a subtle approach to get you to give them money, and it seemingly works as they are all mostly far more profitable, EAware figuratively hits you over the head and smacks you in the face in the drive to get you to subscribe.

 

Keep the restrictions, but stop pointing out the restrictions every minute. I'm sure even the noobiest "WoWtard" can figure out the restrictions and whether he/she wants to pay to get past them without the xp bar having text telling them how gimped they are.

 

If a restaurant invites you in for a free burger but then has someone standing over you the whole time smearing a steak into your face, does it make you want to pay for the steak? Do you even want to finish your "free" burger at that point? Or does it make you want to go to that other free burger joint that tells you once you can buy a steak if you want it and then leaves you alone to make your own decision as you eat your free burger?

Edited January 22, 2014 by Zorvan

[The_Grand_Nagus]

For everyone complaining that SWTOR's F2P restrictions are too much, compare them to other F2P MMO's and see that they are close to the same.

 

While this is generally true, Bioware is the only studio I have seen charge people for user interface. That is a level of absurdity I have not seen anywhere else.

[CosmicKat]

According to information EA shared during the earnings call in the last quarter of 2013, the subscriber numbers at their lowest point were "significantly" below 500,000 and at the time just before the earnings call were "nearly" 500,000.

 

If we call "significantly" 20% and "nearly" 5%, that's an increase of about 75,000 subscribers in the time since the game went F2P. If the trough was closer to 350,000 as some believe and "nearly" is 10%, that's an increase of about 100,000 subscribers.

 

Those numbers represent between $13.5 and $18 million dollars annually.

 

Negligible? Meaningless?

 

I'd love to have 10% of that negligible, meaningless money, please!

 

I'm just basing it on it what I saw and/or see.

 

EA's numbers should always be taken with a truckload of salt. They are not an impartial source.

 

Not that it is something unique to EA, every MMO inflates their numbers to comical levels. It's only when they shut down that true numbers come out and they are almost always far lower than anything they previously report.

[DarthTHC]

I'm just basing it on it what I saw and/or see.

 

EA's numbers should always be taken with a truckload of salt. They are not an impartial source.

 

Not that it is something unique to EA, every MMO inflates their numbers to comical levels. It's only when they shut down that true numbers come out and they are almost always far lower than anything they previously report.

 

As a publicly traded company, every single statement EA executives make on an earnings call is required by law to be truthful. If they lie, especially if that lie is of the exaggeration to make their stock more enticing variety (as an inflation in subscriber numbers would be), the SEC unloads a can of whoop-*** on them.

 

Use all the salt you want. It won't change facts.

Edited January 22, 2014 by DarthTHC

[Infernixx]

As a publicly traded company, every single statement EA executives make on an earnings call is required by law to be truthful. If they lie, especially if that lie is of the exaggeration variety, the SEC unloads a can of whoop-*** on them.

 

Use all the salt you want. It won't change facts.

 

Don't be silly, as we all know, MMO companies can lie about whatever they like in their official earnings statements and they do so all the time.

 

lol some people

[The_Grand_Nagus]

As a publicly traded company, every single statement EA executives make on an earnings call is required by law to be truthful. If they lie, especially if that lie is of the exaggeration variety, the SEC unloads a can of whoop-*** on them.

 

Use all the salt you want. It won't change facts.

 

Just to be clear, I dont think EA is lying about anything. However, companies DO lie; that is a fact. Some get away with it, some dont. But whenever that happens, there is always someone who will say what you just did, as if it means it is impossible for them to lie, when that obviously isnt the case. Just because a company(not EA, but in general) hasnt been caught yet does not mean they have not done anything wrong. Your logic is like saying that no one will commit a crime because it is against the law and they will get arrested. Um, no.

[CosmicKat]

As a publicly traded company, every single statement EA executives make on an earnings call is required by law to be truthful. If they lie, especially if that lie is of the exaggeration to make their stock more enticing variety (as an inflation in subscriber numbers would be), the SEC unloads a can of whoop-*** on them.

 

Use all the salt you want. It won't change facts.

 

Say they want to report 100k but actually only have 50k.... Poof! 50k "comp" accounts are created and voila, they now have 100k accounts.

 

Regulators don't write the regulations, the corporations that fall under the rules of those regulations do.

[DarthTHC]

Don't be silly, as we all know, MMO companies can lie about whatever they like in their official earnings statements and they do so all the time.

 

lol some people

 

Really? Can you show actual evidence of any publicly traded MMO company falsifying protected information in their favor?

 

But don't show it to me, show it to the SEC and collect your reward.

[Infernixx]

Say they want to report 100k but actually only have 50k.... Poof! 50k "comp" accounts are created and voila, they now have 100k accounts.

 

Regulators don't write the regulations, the corporations that fall under the rules of those regulations do.

 

Conspiracy theories now? lol

[Andryah]

Having been here off and on since shortly after launch, I can say that the ONLY time there was ever a noticeable and sustained increase in players has been since the GSF launch.

 

- Up to the server merges it was the most rapid decline in populations I've ever seen in any MMO, and I've played some way worse than TOR.

 

- F2P stabilized the collapse but any increases in numbers were negligible. Factoring in that many of those new players are paying nothing, and any increase is essentially meaningless.

 

- Other "major" patches and events resulted in minor and short-lived bumps in numbers, as they do in every MMO.

 

They expanded content and made it included with a subscription and got (and seem to have retained) more subscribers. Imagine that. It's almost like they discovered the rules of commerce that have existed since the invention of commerce.

 

The server I play on mostly, Ebon Hawk, has been at least 25% busier since GSF. Here's hoping their Holy Metrics make the connection between treating the customer well and getting/retaining more customers.

 

All the servers, even the PvP servers saw a large surge with RoTHC last year. To the point where a number of the servers were collapsing daily from the population pressure. Server restarts to fix crashed servers were common for the first couple of months after RoTHC went live.

 

So.. NO... GSF is not the biggest surge since the game went F2P. But yes.. GSF has injected a surge into servers. Expacs are like that. They draw new players and returning players in force. Which is why the pace of expacs SWTOR is doing is good.. it results in more surges over a shorter period of time. And sure enough.. after the content is consumed and interest wanes, the surge subsides and activity returns to more normal level common between major patches or expacs.

Edited January 22, 2014 by Andryah

[DarthTHC]

Say they want to report 100k but actually only have 50k.... Poof! 50k "comp" accounts are created and voila, they now have 100k accounts.

 

Regulators don't write the regulations, the corporations that fall under the rules of those regulations do.

 

"Subscriber" has a pretty clear definition.

 

Seriously, resorting to accusing EA of committing crimes is not going to help you make your case.

[CosmicKat]

Really? Can you show actual evidence of any publicly traded MMO company falsifying protected information in their favor?

 

But don't show it to me, show it to the SEC and collect your reward.

 

*points to the actually documented criminal activity that was the near collapse of the financial system and the no people in jail for it*

[CosmicKat]

"Subscriber" has a pretty clear definition.

 

Seriously, resorting to accusing EA of committing crimes is not going to help you make your case.

 

No. I accused them of committing business, not crimes. Same thing as the Florida Panthers announcing a paid attendance of 18,000 while 16 people are actually in the seats.