I honestly don’t see your point. We are talking about people who already possess computers and internet access not wanting to pay for entertainment. The argument was about moving your money around depending on what you really wish to spend it on. Having grown up poor I’m quite familiar with the concept.
1 Like
The problem is not on the lack of disposable income, is in what people percieve as more attractive.
There are several studies done by marketers that something free get’s way more attention than something that costs 1 single buck, for example:
2048 and the game Threes!, one is free and the other costs money. it is known that 2048 is clone of Threes! and the lesser version… but 2048 gains way more revenue than Threes! trough ads. Why? Because the demand of something free is way bigger, like a eletrical current a consumer prefers the way with less resistance, naturally.
Edit: I subscribe to World of Warcraft by the way.
Video games are not commodity, I’m pretty sure they are a form of entertainment, which can be categorized as a type of luxury.
@azebu95 Last time I checked. 20% of the world don’t even make $2 a day, and 10-25% of Americans can’t even find a “cashier in fast-food” job. Don’t forget these are people struggling to pay rent and living expenses alone, not including their mountain of deferred student loan. And if you think they are stuck in this predicament because they are oh, not as much a “smart guy” as you are, a good 20% of them have graduated high school, 15% of them have graduated college, and I doubt the are much less of a “smart guy” as you are, unless the ruler for being a “smart guy” you are using instead measures how much money they happen to have.
Surely being such a “smart guy” as you are, you must know that “saving up” is the best way to lose 10-15% of your purchasing power over the last 5 years.
If this game catered to self-entitled and rich “smart guys” like you. I think ToS would have a population of this. But wait, none of them would give a crap about ToS, so how about the population of Dodo.
Oh yeah I wasn’t really making an argument either for or against F2P at that time. Just stating that if there is something you want – at a reasonable price – there are ways to acquire it. That is unless you’re completely destitute, in which case you’re probably not worried about MMOs.
We already established that the person is attracted to the game and wishes to play it, but worries about coming up with the money. ^^
2 Likes
I feel like it could survive with Ragnarok Online’s massive fan base backing it, if it realises the dream of being that true successor. I fear it may be too slow for that however. It totally depends on the interest levels of the game after it comes out as to whether it can survive as a P2P. If it does choose to go P2P, it has to be cheap, and if it goes F2P, it needs to try to be more like BDO. Selling items which are purely cosmetic.
2 Likes
I think you need to relax, @Azebu95 isn’t exactly trying to curb-stomp the poor into the ground or anything of the sort.
What point are you trying to make exactly?
Ohh there is one thing that can give them looots of money, the character slots. As we know the barracks comport Spaces for both Characters and Pets, and it can be extended.
Edit: you start with 4, there are like 5600 combinations of builds.
Having comprehension problems? let me break that down for you:-
If this game catered to self-entitled and rich “smart guys” like you.
If ToS implemented revenue streams as @azebu95 prefers, that means the game is for rich “smart guys” only.
I think ToS would have a population of this. But wait, none of them would give a crap about ToS, so how about the population of Dodo.
My personal opinion is that ToS would lose all its player base and therefore go extinct as the Dodos have.
Having comprehension problems?
Rude! First rule of debate is attack the argument, not the person.
If ToS implemented revenue streams as @azebu95 prefers, that means the game is for rich “smart guys” only.
But this simply isn’t true. Firstly, how does a game cater to the self entitled, and secondly, how can someone not afford one or two dollars a week to fund their primary entertainment? Unless you are entirely destitute I find that incredibly hard to believe. Then again, I cannot speak for countries I do not inhabit, so feel welcome to enlighten me on that point.
My personal opinion is that ToS would lose all its player base and therefore go extinct as the Dodos have.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but I believe we do not have the data to make such a conclusion. The best we can do is a heuristic approximation of what we believe would work, and as such I think all three routes (F2P, B2P, P2P) have merit in some way. The main factor in what business model to take is what regions the game is intended for. F2P has been proven as the optimal model in the Asian region, whereas the West seems to prefer B2P or P2P. We simply can’t tell what IMC will do, as their game straddles the East-West divide, although considering that the Korean version of ToS is F2P, that seems the likely route.
2 Likes
You’re being unpleasant.
1 Like
F2P is the way to go to survive in the market, it opens door for everyone. Poor people can play it, and rich people can throw money as much as they want, more than just subscription fee each month.
But personally I wish IMCgames go with P2P without cash shop at all. So every content, including cosmetics, can be (or rather, should be) acquired in-game, and I don’t have to pay for every single one of them.
It’s unlikely to happen though. /sob
4 Likes
I see no problem if it’s cosmetic but maybe that’s League of legends beating my wallet into the ground.
Yeah it won’t cause any problems if it’s only cosmetic. However, it is more fun to more items to acquire by in-game means instead of just buying them. Which gives people a reason to keep playing. So. HMMMM.
1 Like
Well it can always have 2 prices.
Yep! But many times companies only offer them for real money to force people to buy. Sometimes bound to character or account, too.
Complete fallacy. Just because one of the people interested in it being P2P says they “don’t care about poor people” doesn’t mean the game caters to entitled people. I also would prefer a P2P system and I’m poor, I live in a stagnated 3rd world country. You’re the one being judgemental of people who prefer the game to have a monthly fee, and I don’t think that’s what you want to do, so please calm down.
Another thing is that, you don’t need to care if he cares or not about poor people. While you might think that poor people need help, they’ll get help from people who WANT to help them, and you shouldn’t try to convince the guy to think about them by shaming him or throwing links at him.
Going back to the issue at hand, @Sharp I understand your point of view, but you can’t actually compare Ad revenue with F2P. Ad revenue works by the premisse that popularity actually reverts to profit. Each person that opens 2048 and sees the Ad automatically generated revenue. That’s not true for F2P games, only about 10% of the playerbase actually spends money on the cash shop, with P2W items actually selling much more than just cosmetic items. My fonts on that affirmation is the Extra Credits video which does a good job to explain what this means, and a interview with a Pearl Abyss employee, developers of Black Desert Online, explaining why they needed to make their cash shop like that (basically their publisher told them to do so). Those are the reasons why there’s always some gameplay restriction or benefit, even if it’s mostly cosmetic.
Note that unlocking more character slots or storage space IS a gameplay benefit, it allows you to play different characters and to store more items that can be useful.
2 Likes
f2p items can be tradeable? is the big question
I am too a fan of Extra credits, except when they start the social politics stuff.
So if it doesn’t work out to be Free, why most MMO’s today start with a subscirption model and quickly revert it?
And the character slots are not a explicit mechanical benefit so it’s not buying power.
P2P games eventually die. F2P survive longer. There is a lot of evidence that shows this.
There are lots of F2P business models as there are lots of P2P business models. As long as they keep it simple, balanced and at a fair price, people will always be glad to “contribute” to a game they love by buying cosmetics and stuff. Two examples of extremely profitable F2P games are League of Legends and Farmville. Both have diferent models and both did great.
I will always encourage F2P because the audience is a lot bigger. Even if some (very) young players will never be able to spend money on your game, you will get a solid fan base for your future games. If you think in terms on player lifespan monetization F2P is the way to go (if you are a devoted developer and not a money grabber).
2 Likes
I do think one of the reasons that many WoW clone MMOs go F2P after a while is lack of content/draw to play after a while. WoW adds new content to keep people entertained and has been around so long that there’s a lot to do. But with a game like Aion or Tera or whatever…The game just isn’t worth paying for in most peoples’ opinions. Hahahaha. (I bought and subscribed to both, years ago. And only for a few months.)
But with the hope that ToS will have the same open feeling as RO and provide a worthwhile feeling at all levels of play, not just end game, it might work out.
1 Like