38 studios Auction Nov 14th and 15th.
- Thread starter Dahkoht_sl
- Start date
Utnayan
F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
- 16,314
- 12,083
I do think the game might have been pretty good but I have no idea how he was ever going to see a return on that massive investment going F2P.[/quote]
8 times out of 10, a F2P game makes more money than a sub based game. I would bet if Blizzard pulled their Subscription model and started selling even more mounts, gadgets, and concentrated solely on a trinket market only selling boxed expansions, they would double their revenue in 6 months.
I never understood the stigma of why people think when a game goes F2P it is on it's last legs. Or when it comes out as F2P.
8 times out of 10, a F2P game makes more money than a sub based game. I would bet if Blizzard pulled their Subscription model and started selling even more mounts, gadgets, and concentrated solely on a trinket market only selling boxed expansions, they would double their revenue in 6 months.
I never understood the stigma of why people think when a game goes F2P it is on it's last legs. Or when it comes out as F2P.
Daidraco
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 9,312
- 9,419
I really dont have the data to look at, but Ive always thought that idea was a little misleading. Is it not based "mostly" off of games that were Subscriber based then switch to F2P? Which in case, yes, they are making more money than they were as a Subscriber based game. This has to be the case, because I just dont see Blizzard passing up the opportunity to make more money. Besides, Blizzard already has a cash shop on top of their subscriber base.
Utnayan
F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
- 16,314
- 12,083
I think the biggest thing is predictability. You stand a chance to make a great deal more money, but it is also uncontrolled. With sub revenue, you can easily determine what money will come in. F2P is more money, but unpredictable. I am guessing Blizzard wants predictability, but they have both now and probably make a substantial amount selling little green companions for $10 a shot and $25 for a wild looking flying mount. The math in how much people have played WoW compared to how many games they could have bought compared to the patched content (Not expansions) is astounding to look at.
Erronius
Macho Ma'am
- 16,491
- 42,462
The data is misleading because most MMOs don't want to give out the numbers anymore. That's whyMMOData.netis shutting down - it's hard running a site based on MMO data when no one wants to give you actual insight as to how their game is doing.
We've seen different studios go F2P and the common theme is"We went F2P and now we're making 10000000 times the revenue that we were before!". The flip side of that is that they take the immediate (and probably unsustainable) revenue increase, and then they compare it to the revenue that existedRIGHT BEFOREthey went F2P...that is to say, they skew the numbers by having part of the equation being the numbers from what made them go F2P in the first place.
Let's say I have a lemonade stand and I try selling"Tyen's super-salty dicksnot lemonade"and my sales, predictably, fall to a single sale (thankfully, Trexx bought a glass!). After a short period of panic I change to selling"Dr. Utnayan's sour health elixir"and my sales goes up to 5 sales a day. Now, even though a grand total of 5 sales is still terribad for a business, I could do exactly what many studios do and brag about creating a 400% increase in sales. Without context it's pretty damn meaningless: it could mean that their sales were in the shitter and now their sales are are less shitty, or it could actually be something impressive.
I mean, great. So you changed to F2P and you saw some immediate benefits. Take SS #1: the only thing we can take at face value is the 330k new players, but even then I'd want to see the numbers 6mo out from this. Did they stay? Were they new accounts by people just popping in to see the game for free, and then did they continue or did they all leave again? And ok, 600% in concurrent usage...was that sustainable? I doubt it. Plus how relevant is 600% when you don't know what the numbers were from before they went F2P? 600% could represent a mediocre gain or an incredible gain, but we can't tell. And SS #2...more of the same. +200% item sales? Well I would hope so, if you brought in a bunch of new players...but how did this hold up? Was this a one-time increase never to be seen again? 40% daily login and 300% in new players...more of the same issue. What do I compare the percentage increases to, and were these flash in the pan increases or not?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that F2P doesn't have it's place, but people need to be careful when we're talking about MMOs. Especially when we're talking about MMOs who have changed from subs to F2P. I'm sure that there may have been one or two out there that didn't change to F2P because they were losing their collective shirts...I can't think of any atm but I suppose it's plausible...but by and large most change because they hemorrhage players/subs and they need to bring new players in.
I think the difference with LOL is that it didn't go F2P after losing subs because it wasn't popular enough to make the subscription model work (ergo needing to go F2P for a quick injection of new players). On top of that I'd say that LOL probably works better as F2P than would most traditional MMOs.
I actually expect MMOs to segue towards being more like LOL/DOTA 2 and going all-in on F2P/Microtransations. It's one of those things that I hope I am wrong about but the years of WOW clones didn't really produce a new mega-hit while LOL/DOTA 2 are insanely popular. Another example might be games like MWO or the upcoming 40K game, where they look to embrace more of an FPS/arena design with Founders packs and micros inherent in the game's design.
The long term view that I find somewhat ironic is that Curt and 38S were trying to develop an MMO in an industry where MMO success it's pretty damned difficult. I've long said that they should have started out creating a stable of other games whose revenue could fund future development without having to go to the extremes that Curt had to for funding. But if it turns out that traditional MMOs are on their way out, so to speak, and the future is going to be hybrids or MMOs that are "lite" when compared to WOW, then it will make Curt's pushing for his big MMO seem a bit tragic when they could have simply developed smaller and possibly more profitable games without having to go through all that shit with RI.
OneofOne
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 6,674
- 8,255
Well, that's not the difference - this MMO 38 was making was also going to be FTP out of the gate - no box, no sub, nada. It wasn't going to have the baggage associated with sub/box games that go FTP. I do have to wonder, as another poster did, how they were going to cover costs with a FTP MMO, because you're right, LoL is as similar to MMO's as StarCraft is. A FTP MMO from the getgo sounds interesting, but one that costs (or would have by release) over $100m? That's one helluva big chance, in a genre that's already crowded full of losers.
FTP has proven there is a ton of money there, but I am curious how current FTP MMOs are doing.
j00t
Silver Baronet of the Realm
- 7,380
- 7,473
small thread necro, but there are several companies that started f2p and are doing relatively well. Marvel Heroes is a great example of how f2p can work. it drives the devs to compete with not only other companies, but also their player base. what I mean is, if the devs want people to keep playing their game, they need to churn out content and they need to do it as quickly as possible because the player base will always burn through content quicker than it can be made. so they have to work HARD to keep players playing. they also need to keep their game relevant when you have direct competitors. they did a big event when d3 reaper of souls launched. why? because they don't have the luxury of relying on subs. "eh, we lost some traffic, but they didn't unsub so we're still good."
wow is really it's own beast at this point and has been for several years. blizzard doesn't go f2p because it's not fiscally responsible for them to do so. they'd have to put some SERIOUS cash barriers up or they would lose 95% of their intake. even then... I've been playing wow on and off since beta... mostly on, but there's been some dry spells here and there. I've given blizzard more money for wow than every other game I've played put together. if they went f2p i'd feel happy not giving them anymore money. I think most people would be in that boat. when a game like swtor or lotro goes f2p, if you enjoy it, you want to support it. you feel a sort of sense of kinship and know that your money actually means something to them. with blizzard? yeah. they don't need my money. if wow went f2p and I played wow until I died, i'd still feel like i'd have given them enough support already and wouldn't plan on given them another dime.
lol and dota are kind of different beasts as well though simply because of the style of game they are. if a moba game came out with a sub I don't think anyone would give it the time of day. it feels disingenuous to the genre. f2p really feels like it's the new direction in online gaming. devs just need to find the right balance between pay walls and ACTUALLY f2p. I mentioned swtor... when the f2p change came out it was done in such a poor way that it permanently turned people off. it's REALLY not that bad of a paywall... and they've gotten a ton quicker with putting out content, even if they are just cash shop items. if the game was released as f2p I think it would have done a lot better.
wow is really it's own beast at this point and has been for several years. blizzard doesn't go f2p because it's not fiscally responsible for them to do so. they'd have to put some SERIOUS cash barriers up or they would lose 95% of their intake. even then... I've been playing wow on and off since beta... mostly on, but there's been some dry spells here and there. I've given blizzard more money for wow than every other game I've played put together. if they went f2p i'd feel happy not giving them anymore money. I think most people would be in that boat. when a game like swtor or lotro goes f2p, if you enjoy it, you want to support it. you feel a sort of sense of kinship and know that your money actually means something to them. with blizzard? yeah. they don't need my money. if wow went f2p and I played wow until I died, i'd still feel like i'd have given them enough support already and wouldn't plan on given them another dime.
lol and dota are kind of different beasts as well though simply because of the style of game they are. if a moba game came out with a sub I don't think anyone would give it the time of day. it feels disingenuous to the genre. f2p really feels like it's the new direction in online gaming. devs just need to find the right balance between pay walls and ACTUALLY f2p. I mentioned swtor... when the f2p change came out it was done in such a poor way that it permanently turned people off. it's REALLY not that bad of a paywall... and they've gotten a ton quicker with putting out content, even if they are just cash shop items. if the game was released as f2p I think it would have done a lot better.
For me i consider free to play like box sales.
Usually you pay a one-time-fee to get a bag and perhaps a character class, after that it's free.
If it doesn't look to be free after that i skip it.
That's alot less money if i stick around for half a year than a sub would be. Also if i come back for a month or two every year like i did with city of heroes, it would generate no additional revenue.
Usually you pay a one-time-fee to get a bag and perhaps a character class, after that it's free.
If it doesn't look to be free after that i skip it.
That's alot less money if i stick around for half a year than a sub would be. Also if i come back for a month or two every year like i did with city of heroes, it would generate no additional revenue.
I think the first MMOs to go free to play did really well. It was a novelty and people weren't used to the cash shops. Like when DDO and LotR went f2p.
I don't think free to plays do so well today. There's a ton of free to plays and people know all the cash shop tricks. If given a choice, game companies would choose a sub model.
I would like to see some numbers.
I don't think free to plays do so well today. There's a ton of free to plays and people know all the cash shop tricks. If given a choice, game companies would choose a sub model.
I would like to see some numbers.
Rhanyn
Blackwing Lair Raider
- 1,016
- 1,394
Free to play is for dumb suckers like me. I get lured in with the free to play, to see if I like it. Discover x,y, or z friend/s playing it and either get frustrated with the limited use/wear/chat/trade/bagspace (oh dear lord please thunder smite fuck the cunt that discovered limiting bag space in f2p) etc. or get nagged into sub'ing. Then I convince myself that doing the 3 month sub nets me the extra few bucks saving, click submit, have my credit card raped, and never log in again after that night.... That's where their revenue comes from.
arallu
Golden Knight of the Realm
- 536
- 47
spronk
FPS noob
- 22,700
- 25,832
Haha I guess its no surprise curt doesn't believe in evolution. So many jokes write itself there.
After a Brief Suspension for Defending Evolution, ESPNs Keith Law Returns to Twitter with This Gem
After a Brief Suspension for Defending Evolution, ESPNs Keith Law Returns to Twitter with This Gem
If you want to make an argument against Evolution don't say something like "show me trasitional fossils". Mostly because they exist. Say something like "Then explain what the fuck is up with the PLatypus" or "If we evolved from apes why do apes still exist". At least then you have some sort of trolling argument.
No surprise that a mindless bible thumper would be against evolution.
One thing is certain, however, is that he's far too much of a pussy to ever show up here again.
One thing is certain, however, is that he's far too much of a pussy to ever show up here again.