605 replies to this topic

[MajorLeeHung]

Thank you for taking the time to inform everyone! Plus this will give me something other then World of Tanks to dump my wife's hard earned money into =P

[CoffiNail]

Great article on Tribes Ascend being F2P that corresponds to this thread. http://www.pcgamer.c...-play/#comments

[Elizander]

CoffiNail, on 24 February 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

Great article on Tribes Ascend being F2P that corresponds to this thread. http://www.pcgamer.c...-play/#comments

This article is very true. People often underestimate the power of just simply having a good game. People play, they tell their friends, and those guys tell their friends and so on. It's a difficult balance to hit, to be honest, and you have to be keen and on top of the community and their concerns instead of tunnel visioning on "SELL SELL SELL!" which some companies have a habit of doing.

Though it's not on a global or international scale, I've already worked on several local F2P games (and even a P2P one) who had skilled and cooperative developers and together we've managed to do as the above article mentioned: Significantly increase the number of players, increase the game's revenue, all for $0.00 spent on advertising. Make it fun, make your prices fair, address player concerns (hacks, bugs, customer support issues), and have constant content and you're good to go.

Sure it requires a crapload of community immersion/interaction, gameplay knowledge/experience, and daily data analysis and trending/habit studies before you can see the big picture, but that's more practical than blindly throwing millions into advertising while simply assuming your product is made of gold.

[Atonal]

My biggest concern prior to gameplay balance, etc with F2P shooters is...
Lag. Unless they plan to have servers for different regions, I'm fully expecting shots taken from behind walls, killed before you see someone turn the corner, and shots not registering correctly. Either that, they have a really good network/servers established which isn't usually the case when it comes to almost all F2P games compared to P2P games. In my experience, F2P have the most unstable servers/network compared to P2P games. UNLESS, that game started as a P2P game in the beginning(But you honestly can't count that).

[Sesambrot]

Atonal, on 25 February 2012 - 01:57 AM, said:

My biggest concern prior to gameplay balance, etc with F2P shooters is...
Lag. Unless they plan to have servers for different regions, I'm fully expecting shots taken from behind walls, killed before you see someone turn the corner, and shots not registering correctly. Either that, they have a really good network/servers established which isn't usually the case when it comes to almost all F2P games compared to P2P games. In my experience, F2P have the most unstable servers/network compared to P2P games. UNLESS, that game started as a P2P game in the beginning(But you honestly can't count that).

Don't be so pessimistic about it...
Tribes Ascend is actually the best example in that regard, I never had any of the issues you described. Even WoT ususally doesn't have issues like that.
If the game is actually built as a F2P-MMOFPS from scratch, it can be taken into account, and appropriate servers can be set up.

You should really try the two and see for yourself, it actually works almost perfectly, no lag at all with a half decent connection. (even for me on WLAN)

[Benden]

Hi everyone

It was a good news for me to learn that MWO would be free to play for those reason :
* Wider audience than a game with monthly fee/one time purchase
Sure, mechwarrior veteran will have to play with people who never heard/played about mechwarrior, "tourists" and curious players, newbies etc but at least it gives a chance for the game to be *kept out from a niche and usualy the more the players the more viable $ it is.

*Longer life span
We had to wait for years for a new mechwarrior title, at least this model will allow us to keep playing this game for years while they add features regurlarly. An indeed, this model allows them to hear from us and tweak the game according to playrs feedback.
Also, it doesn't mean that FASA, Microsoft or whoever can't produce a stand alone new Mechwarrior game.

I was part of the Multiplayer BattleTech 3025 beta, and it really *killed me when EA cancelled it. The concept of real time warfare all over the inner sphere was awesome. And I'm pretty glad that it have been given a second chance with MWO.
Also, if indeed they are alot of FTP games nowadays, some of them are very good. Actually I am playing world of tanks from Wargaming.
net. I think there are a lot of good things to be taken from this tittle (ftp model is fair (not a money to win), successful (large audience, mosty in russia though), updates and community. Many flaws too (balance, game modes etc.) but at least a good inspiration.
My 2 cents

[CCC Dober]

I would like to see MW:O succeed with F2P.
Having experienced WoT and its implementation, there are several traps in that regard (some are more obvious than others). The game is fundamentally flawed as a result, despite the visionary concept and easy access. I'd be happy to assist in avoiding said traps, having more than 15k+ battles ever since Closed Beta under the belt.

At your service

[neodym]

becose I am poor lol

[Maris]

Fluffinator, on 19 February 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

Yep DDO and AoC are 2 of them that made that transition and as someone who played both of them before and after that transition I can tell you that both became far more expensive to play under the FTP method than they were when they were sub only. After the change to FTP most my friends in those games started dropping off like flys saying it was just too expensive now. And I eventually left for the same reason...their free to play model was just too darn expensive compared to a sub.

Yet DDO and Lotro are actually much more profitable and gain a lot of new players after transitioning to the F2P model.

You also fail to mention why AoC and a whole lot of other sub-model MMOs are moving towards F2P. Because its unsustainable. They failed. Its that simple. The market and consumer preferences in MMO has changed over the past decade. You may dislike it, you may rage and hate it but that's the simple truth. Sub model is a dated unflexible methodology and will only work for a select special cases nowadays, namely, if you are Blizzard, Bioware or that successful enough to maintain it like Eve Online. (note that Eve Online also feature a unique F2P option).

I've played DDO, AoC and Lotro btw, before they went F2P and after they went F2P.

Its not the F2P thats the problem but its how the different companies lay out their F2P plan. There are those that will try to force players to pay in order to even have a chance to be competitive (and those won't be as successful) and there are those the recognise that players do not like to be forced to pay (hopefully PGI will be like this). F2p is not a single monolithic payment method like the traditional sub style is. Its fluid and very dynamic and you cannot pin one F2P failure as evidence on the rest of the F2P mmos because the sub MMO model had even more failures than the the F2P one.

[SnapCase]

I think he means that in most (if not all) f2p games you can either grind out virtual currency by playing the game or use the option of pulling out your wallet and buying it. Usually the rate at which you can grind it out ingame takes hours and hours for very little income that makes buying your gear the only option if you actually want to be able to compete. The 'best' stuff will cost the most and the folks buying it will have it far sooner than the folks grinding for it.

Mechwarrior games to this point were never about who had the best gear or higher stats but more about the loadout on your mech and the manner in which you brought your weapons to bare. I fear that the f2p format and the manner in which these games (the ones I've seen) go about generating a return on their product has a direct affect on players' ability to compete at the highest levels. To be honest I'd rather a small subscription fee so that everyone was on the same level as far as whats available to them in the mechbay, then wins and losses come down to what they should come down to... skill.

[nightsniper]

I am not sold on a free to play game my experience with Free to play is the companies do not have the revenue to keep up with the game or they are just milking the cash cows dry. Big Point is a total disaster for the past month they have had most of their servers American and European up only part of the weekends. They don't listen to the players nor do they respond to questions or even tickets submitted to tech support. They maybe making money now but they will not continue to do so. BSGO has fewer and fewer players on everyday. WOT which some people love has had to shelve their expansion plans World of war planes and World at sea because of falling players participation and revenue. I know that app market has proven free to play is attractive but MWO I am a skeptic. I would rather see a nominal monthly fee like 9.00 US or something around that and then some premium offered on a micro transaction basis but not required.

One other issue is the wallet warrior something the investors love to death but it undercuts a group that can be hard core support for the game. Wallet Warriors also cut the shelf life of most games into the wonder of the week. I honestly would think long and hard about anything modelled on either of these current models and look at more of a hybrid to undercut WOW monthly fee and make it more attractive to a bigger group.

I normally charge $150.00 an hour billable for my Economic advice but for MWO it is on the house.

Best to all!

[nightsniper]

As I was saying the Free to Play group seems to be struggling Battle Star Galactica online is dieing, Their servers are having such a huge problem most have been down or unplayable for 4 weeks now. Players are posting and leaving in droves and they are on their 6th lead developer in 4 months. I can not imagine a worse case for a free to play.

I suspect much has to do with revenue either the wish for more profits or a real tight budget. Reports also include server gateways with up to an 80% packet loss posted in their forums.

The bug has hit the two other big PC games their as well. I think free to play is struggling with this fragile economy no matter how good they once looked. Think long and hard you may only get one real shot at this even a hybrid $6.00 a month or 60 a year with Micro trasactions for enhancements like skins, logo's, Storage, enhancement bonus like salvage, collection, repair etc seems to me to be a safer bet in these market conditions.

[Elizander]

nightsniper, on 28 February 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

As I was saying the Free to Play group seems to be struggling Battle Star Galactica online is dieing, Their servers are having such a huge problem most have been down or unplayable for 4 weeks now. Players are posting and leaving in droves and they are on their 6th lead developer in 4 months. I can not imagine a worse case for a free to play.

I suspect much has to do with revenue either the wish for more profits or a real tight budget. Reports also include server gateways with up to an 80% packet loss posted in their forums.

The bug has hit the two other big PC games their as well. I think free to play is struggling with this fragile economy no matter how good they once looked. Think long and hard you may only get one real shot at this even a hybrid $6.00 a month or 60 a year with Micro trasactions for enhancements like skins, logo's, Storage, enhancement bonus like salvage, collection, repair etc seems to me to be a safer bet in these market conditions.

If a P2P game had problems like that players would just go elsewhere because it is not worth paying up front for a game you can't play. F2P users can still try to log in because it does not cost them money to wait out the problem. Any prolonged problem of that magnitude will ruin anyone.

Actual inability to do something as basic as maintaining their own servers really is irrelevant. This is a common problem in some MMOs where the original developers go elsewhere and they leave some clueless guy behind in charge. This has happened to P2P games as well. It actually has nothing to do with the F2P model. F2P is capable of producing reliable revenue just like P2P, but that doesn't mean that all of them will. F2P is reliant on developer content, but then so are P2P games.

People who do not understand player habits, trending, and their own products are bound to fail after the initial rush of excitement is gone from their game. Games are expected to limp along if hacks and bugs are not fixed, if good service cannot be maintained, and if no new content is released, but since the game is free, they can always bounce back since people can check (without paying) if their previous issues have been addressed. Decent customer support is also important.

Publishers who also delude themselves into thinking that a sudden burst in revenue can be easily maintained and increase their projections without thinking will often find themselves in trouble when they find out that it was just for that week or month that it happened. Investing money made from game (x) into game (y) and not leaving enough budget for game (x) is also a common issue that gets people in trouble.

There is nothing wrong with the F2P model, but it is not a gold sticker that you can just slap onto your product and expect it to generate cash non-stop with little to no effort.

I get paid about $2.35 per hour and I've been working in the local online game publishing industry for the past seven years. For MW:O, my advice is also free.

[GD26]

A F2P-MMO version is what the great BattleTech franchise missed all these years.

It was about time.

So many other franchises that pale in comparison are well rooted into the MMO world for years. I always felt sadness at the thought that BattleTech/MechWarrior never got to this level.

Well we finally got MWLL last year (or is it two years now?) but even there one has to have the damn Crysis game purchased and installed in order to be able to play…Damn Crytek engine needed.

Quote

How many times have you bought a game for 60 bucks and felt disappointed? Or if you're like me, paid 60 bucks, played for 2 hours and never touched the game again because you get busy with life or work? Or loved a game so much, that you wished there was more, only to wait 2 years for a sequel! The Free-To-Play model solves this problem by allowing players to drive value and content. – InnerSphereNews

Or not to mention paying for a PC game which with today’s Windows upgrading pace will be useless in 2-3 years. I’ve got good games I’ve paid for back in the ‘90s I’m very fond of and I can’t play them anymore because now I have Windows XP or 7’s incompatibility’s to thank for!

F2P-MMO is the perfect way to go if you ask me. Is the way of the future.

I can’t wait to finally meet a version of this favorite franchise that’s constantly updated and evolving where players can join in at their leisure and find out what a wonderful universe BattleTech really is.

I have waited enough.

[Tygre Sunji]

Why free?
The usual reason: like any good dealer, the first hit is free.

[Hawki]

InnerSphereNews, on 04 November 2011 - 03:21 PM, said:

Sounds like a basket full of carrots to me.

I hate carrots, but i like that your saying, looking foward to how this turns out, I like the fact your going to use the F2P model

[RJF Falconer]

As for me...F2P or not, I dont care...Just finish the Game

[Siilk]

The way I see it, the only good F2P that is not ruining the gameplay is TF2. The most important things here are the following:

a ) TF2's focus on cosmetic modifications(infamous hats). Devs should never underestimate players' desire to customize their ingame alter ego's appearance, people would pay a lot to have their favourite camo/warpaint/House crest on their mech.

b ) All the buyable weapons are, effectively, "not better but different". Such items, even though being really nice to have and fun to use, are not shifting the balance of the game in favour of paying players.

c ) All the non-cosmetic buyable items can be obtained in due time through normal, unpaid gameplay. I must add this is a reasonable amount of playing, not korean-style grind.

I cannot stress enough how important this last two points are. Weekend warriors have their shortcuts for fun while hardcore scene does not have their game experience defiled by "some n00b with a pre-paid 'I WIN' pass". And on top of that, devs have their beloved revenues from selling enormous amounts of virtual hats.

[miqqu]

Is there anything that you can buy with real dosh that is not (or an equal equivalent) available for free by playing?

[Gu4rdi4n]

F2p

Well im playing WOT and im enjoying it. But im a MW fan from day one, so if F2P is like their system, youll have a Fan that wont leave you even if you sell his Thor.....

Fk that, id kill you
JK
Looking forward to MWO very much, wishing you luck in making it and hope its soon available for us scum mw pilots.