News:

"The Most Precious Jewel [One Shot: NC-H]"
Congratulations Mellific & Swashbuckler for completing your RP!

Main Menu

Free to play PC Games

Started by Frelance, October 15, 2011, 11:39:35 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

RubySlippers

Okay then explain one of the hot games right now World of Tanks its purely a f2p with a store model and won many awards over its time as a game and is gaining in popularity? And f2p IMHO saved Champions and Star Trek Online and they are working on a DnD f2p game now so must be making money and they are adding content and such to Cryptics two games they are doing something right.

There are three sorts of f2p gamers ones cheap who play the game free and take the free goodies that come up aka the cheapos but they add players making the game more lasting for those others that do pay.

The ala carte players the norm they spend some money on the game to get perks they want and may drop $20 or more a year.

Serious players they get subscriptions or spend money monthly on the game say $20 a month.

All are important to the f2p model the free players very often impulse by becoming ala carte players if they like the game and the bottom to add players for the Serious types. But my view if the business model works better f2- with a shop and subscriptions optional that is what companies will be doing since they make more money.


Shjade

Quote from: TheGlyphstone on February 15, 2013, 10:55:49 PM
That's probably wise...when a Subscription game goes F2P, that usually indicates its death knell isn't far off, or at least the beginning of a descending slope of quality.

That's not what I meant at all. It's more that the people I used to play WoW with were on less and less often before I unsubbed, so even if it turned free if I went back it'd feel hollow. Even though there's new content, I already feel that I have "beaten" WoW to the extent that it can be beaten, so there's no reason to play more of it.
Theme: Make Me Feel - Janelle Monáe
◕/◕'s
Conversation is more useful than conversion.

TheGlyphstone

#202
Quote from: RubySlippers on February 16, 2013, 10:20:18 AM
Okay then explain one of the hot games right now World of Tanks its purely a f2p with a store model and won many awards over its time as a game and is gaining in popularity? And f2p IMHO saved Champions and Star Trek Online and they are working on a DnD f2p game now so must be making money and they are adding content and such to Cryptics two games they are doing something right.

There are three sorts of f2p gamers ones cheap who play the game free and take the free goodies that come up aka the cheapos but they add players making the game more lasting for those others that do pay.

The ala carte players the norm they spend some money on the game to get perks they want and may drop $20 or more a year.

Serious players they get subscriptions or spend money monthly on the game say $20 a month.

All are important to the f2p model the free players very often impulse by becoming ala carte players if they like the game and the bottom to add players for the Serious types. But my view if the business model works better f2- with a shop and subscriptions optional that is what companies will be doing since they make more money.

WoT started as F2P, not subscription. Free-with-Store is a completely different business model, and one that's quite successful if the game is designed for it from the beginning. I specifically said 'subscription game that goes F2P' - Champions and Star Trek still exist, but they're key examples of the phenomenon I'm talking about...Champions, Star Trek, World of Conan, Warhammer Online, The Old Republic....all games that wanted to be the next big thing, expecting to take in great revenue from subscriptions, failed miserably at such and had to go F2P+cash shop, and now muddle on in a half-living state.

LotR Online is a notable exception that I'll concede. Clearly they did something right.

Quote from: Shjade on February 16, 2013, 05:07:30 PM
That's not what I meant at all. It's more that the people I used to play WoW with were on less and less often before I unsubbed, so even if it turned free if I went back it'd feel hollow. Even though there's new content, I already feel that I have "beaten" WoW to the extent that it can be beaten, so there's no reason to play more of it.
Fair enough, I see what you mean.

RubySlippers

Is it bad for a company to go from the Next-Big-Thing to a game with a good player base and brining in enough money from store purchasers and subscriptions to keep going and make improvements. Cryptic I will note besides two successful games Champions Online and Star Trek Online is coming out with the f2p/store model for the DnD Neverwinter Game. And its part of the Perfect World family and they have also very good games and can play the f2p model well.

Face it suscriptions only is not a good business model there are to many options out there now and when it comes to money f2p with a store is more likely to make money that expecting people to pay $20 a month to play a game. I suspect in time even WoW will need to seriously consider going f2p especially as the competition gets better.

I would say the games will either fail or not based on the market but limping along half-dead not likely if the game attracts people. Champions Online survived when City of Heroes fell and DC Online is having issues and likely will survive that games failure. Star Trek Online again is one that is surviving and the company is adding content so they clearly expect to stay in the market to with that game. Just because a game is not wildly successful doesn't mean its not going to be just successful.

TheGlyphstone

You're still not listening. I did not say 'only subscription games are good', or 'F2P' is bad. But when a game that was subscription-based goes F2P, that indicates it wasn't/isn't performing at a level where it can survive off subscriptions, meaning the choice is F2P or shut down entirely. A game forced into that stage is in its twilight, however long it manages to last afterwards. WoW is no exception, which is where this whole thing started...if it finally goes F2P, that'll be a sign it has reached its dying time. The road to success in modern MMOs is F2P right out of the gate paired with a premium/cash shop.

RubySlippers

Will they die or just the model change to a stable income base that is the issue.

A game going along year after year with a core player base and new players coming and some going is a stable model and stable in business is usually good. It might gain momentum to and get more people but slower over time. Now if the game never adds or improves content it can be an issue then but if they are working on the game its a good sign to me as a player its going to stay. I would not say its a twilight of a game just adapting to the marketplace to stay competative.

WoW IMHO is losing out only due to trying to holding onto its subscription model they would be better off going to a f2p with store model with less privileges but be more open to long term play and also the subscriptions for serious players. If they fail now its going to be a failure to adapt to business as it is and they have competition it is going to impact the game at some point more and more.

HairyHeretic

Quote from: TheGlyphstone on February 17, 2013, 08:54:53 AM
You're still not listening. I did not say 'only subscription games are good', or 'F2P' is bad. But when a game that was subscription-based goes F2P, that indicates it wasn't/isn't performing at a level where it can survive off subscriptions, meaning the choice is F2P or shut down entirely.

Or that those running it figure in todays market they can make more by changing it to a dual mode system.

Quote from: TheGlyphstone on February 17, 2013, 08:54:53 AM
The road to success in modern MMOs is F2P right out of the gate paired with a premium/cash shop.

It does seem that way at the moment. But given how long an MMO takes to make (several years? more?), when the current ones you mentioned were envisioned, subscription models were the name of the game. Changing the game model while making it is likely to add who knows how long to the release date, and there's always going to be the push to get the game onto the market.

Is it better to get it going and add stuff in, change stuff, over coming months, or delay it by those months in order to add more in, or change the format? At least if it is released, you have income coming in for it, even if it isn't perfect. And let's face it, no MMO is ever going to satisfy everyone.
Hairys Likes, Dislikes, Games n Stuff

Cattle die, kinsmen die
You too one day shall die
I know a thing that will never die
Fair fame of one who has earned it.

Teo Torriatte

I'd like to mention another game I found recently... its called Perspective. It's a really cool combination of a first person puzzler and 2d platformer, where you  move around the 3d levels to line up platforms based exactly how you see them from your point of view.

Only caveat is that it requires Directx11, which some comps won't run. But for those that can, it's worth checking out if you like puzzle games with a bit of a twist to them.

http://seewithperspective.com/