Free-To-Play Theory

Recommended Videos

ShadowKatt

New member
Mar 19, 2009
1,410
0
0
A couple months ago a lot of games went free to play that were previously pay to play games, most notably a bunch of games on Steam such as Champions Online, Spiral Knights, and others. I tried out several of them and even came to enjoy Champions enough that I paid for the gold membership anyway just to support the game. I did so, however, against my better judgement, and lately I've been having a lot of second thoughts about putting my money into it because Champions just held their TWO year anniversery.

Two years doesn't seem, to me at least, like an exceedingly long time for an MMO to establish itself, so I find the idea that it went free to be troubling. Games like World of Warcraft have a free model but this came only after many, many years and the game had a well established player base and revenue source. SO I thought about it came came up with this theory.

A star is a ball of hydrogen gas that runs by burning hydrogen into helium. THe majority of its life is spent this way, and MMO's are this way with their paying player base. However, eventually the hydrogen begins to wane, the star becomes calmer as the fuel is largely replaced by helium, and so it is as players either finish up the primary storyline in a game or simply get bored and move on to other games. Then the star, once enough pressure has been added by the lack of fuel to burn, explodes and begins burning the helium inside it with a sudden burst of renewed life, not unlike an MMO going free which results in a massive influx of players and possibly revenue as some new players like myself play to play the game after getting involved.

That's my theory so far on an MMO going free to play. What comes next I can't speculate. In a star, the helium burns until, like the hydrogen, there isn't enough fuel to maintain and the star begins burning oxygen, and then heavier elements, each one burning faster and faster until it collapses or explodes. My concern is that this game that I'm now putting $15 a month into just to play is going to collapse as well and then I'll be out money and an awesome game.

So what do you think? Does an MMO going from Pay to play to Free to play signal the death knell of the game or is that simply the way the MMO industry is shifting in todays times?
 

Jack and Calumon

Digimon are cool.
Dec 29, 2008
4,190
0
41
Well, certain games start out as free to play, and a fair number of them do pretty well. But your theory does seem sound. Only thing left is observation.

*pulls up a chair, gas stove, gas can, a pack of popcorn*

Who wants some? It's not the end of the MMo's, but you can see them from here!

Calumon: Huh? No butter? : (
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
What you're seeing is the evolution of the MMO pricing model from subscription based payments to micro-transactions. Why? Because somewhere, someone in a board room has a pie chart showing there's more revenue to be made that way.

Some of these early FTP bandwagoners like Champions Online will likely not make much of a buck, because they weren't designed from the ground up to take advantage of the pricing model. But newer games, like Guild Wars 2, will be in your pocket from the word go.

So basically, you're still going to be paying a monthly fee, it'll just come in smaller increments, and it will be left to your discretion how much to spend. (Hint: It'll probably end up being more than $15 a month for the average user for the most popular titles).
 

Zechnophobe

New member
Feb 4, 2010
1,077
0
0
ShadowKatt said:
A star is a ball of hydrogen gas that runs by burning hydrogen into helium. THe majority of its life is spent this way, and MMO's are this way with their paying player base. However, eventually the hydrogen begins to wane, the star becomes calmer as the fuel is largely replaced by helium, and so it is as players either finish up the primary storyline in a game or simply get bored and move on to other games. Then the star, once enough pressure has been added by the lack of fuel to burn, explodes and begins burning the helium inside it with a sudden burst of renewed life, not unlike an MMO going free which results in a massive influx of players and possibly revenue as some new players like myself play to play the game after getting involved.
I think you are a bit tainted by a misconception. That being that games only become Free to Play when they start to fail, as some kind of service to the fan base. In reality, FTP models are now being found to be, get this, MORE fiscally viable than the alternative.

There is a lot of reason for this. One being that games of the MMO variety require critical mass. Playing a game with no one else around is less fun. In fact, any game with a strong multiplayer component NEEDS to have a certain number of players for it to be followed and remain relevant. So really, when it comes to business model the first question ends up being:

1) How do we get as many people as possible playing our game?

and second to this:

2) How do we get money from these people while maintaining 1)?

It's a truly radical concept, because it hinges on the idea that you will have people playing your game that have not paid for it, but they will be countered by people who do pay.

Consider that we normally think of a game as having a price. And that everyone pays the price for the game. If we get all mathy on it, though, we could think of it as simply an average price, and that some will pay much more, or much less than that price. Some will pay 0, thus allowing you to call it free to play.

In addition, the price isn't paid all at once. Someone may be playing for weeks, months, or possibly years before they put the money down. But they still do, And that makes it worth it.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,368
0
0
ShadowKatt said:
Well, many MMO's have been forced to go free to play models out of desperation (nobody was playing them, so nobody was paying them) such as Conan and Lord of the Rings, then found they increased their profits well above the meager earnings they had when it was pay to play. Champions didn't have THAT big of a community, not enough to support it anyway, so this is why they made themselves free. A few years ago, people would just laugh at you if you proposed to make an MMO free, now the market has changed. It isn't about "establishing" it's self, it is about maximizing profits. People are just less and less willing to pay for the grind. WoW has taken the "up to level 20 free" also as a desperation move against dropping subscription levels. The age of the pay to play MMO is at it's end, there is no going back.
 

Najos

New member
Aug 4, 2008
452
0
0
Amishdemon said:
Sorry to burst your bubble but that's more of a metaphor than a theory.
I was thinking the same thing. Dude just spent a lot of time talking about stars to make a statement that isn't all that profound. The F2P model has existed for quite some time now and, in some cases, is making more money than the subscription model. The REAL money-maker is subscription and some micro transactions on top of it. WoW does this very effectively, judging by the amount of sparkle ponies I saw the last time I played that game. And the amount of server transfers I made over the years to follow my friends when I would inevitably return.
 

evilneko

Fall in line!
Jun 16, 2011
2,218
49
53
Pfft. F2P doesn't have to be the doom of a game. Just ask Zynga, or any of a number of Korean MMO makers. Microtransaction models often lead to players spending more on the game.

Also it depends on the type of star whether it explodes. The Sun, for instance, will not explode when it enters its next life-cycle stage by running out of hydrogen. It will expand, which is not much better for the Earth, but different. Also the expansion due to switching to helium fuel is quite an apt metaphor for the expansion of the playerbase due to switch to F2P/Microtransaction model. ;)
 

chaosyoshimage

New member
Apr 1, 2011
1,440
0
0
Najos said:
Amishdemon said:
Sorry to burst your bubble but that's more of a metaphor than a theory.
I was thinking the same thing. Dude just spent a lot of time talking about stars to make a statement that isn't all that profound. The F2P model has existed for quite some time now and, in some cases, is making more money than the subscription model. The REAL money-maker is subscription and some micro transactions on top of it. WoW does this very effectively, judging by the amount of sparkle ponies I saw the last time I played that game. And the amount of server transfers I made over the years to follow my friends when I would inevitably return.
Yeah, micro transactions are where the money is.

Personally, MMO's don't seem to be my cup of tea. They all fit this same mold and bore me. I would love a more traditional RPG that just happened to be online though. I'm hoping Star Wars: The Old Republic and Dragon Quest X will be just that.
 

Valiance

New member
Jan 14, 2009
3,823
0
0
You know, most of these games have much more success as free-to-play titles, and the Steam exposure has breathed new life into them if anything. They're nowhere near close to dying as far as I can tell.

I do understand your point, and sometimes it's more of an act of desperation.
 

Euhan01

New member
Mar 16, 2011
376
0
0
Cleril said:
I find Puzzle Pirates from what I've played to be the best free to play MMO in terms of the whole free to play thing.
I agree, I can't think of a game that does it better. It breaks so many of the typical 'MMO' things that I dislike that I can't stop playing it.