Will you play the old republic again, now that its free?
yes
31.9% (67)
31.9% (67)
no
68.1% (143)
68.1% (143)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: old republic free to play is ready. will you be going back?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Fragmented_Faith:
Well bioware being new to the mmo market makes -some- of the blunders excusable but, and I say this in any discussion involving mmos. Not only did bioware far exceed its reach financially and deliver a frankly underwhelming mechanical experience (combat was wow standard) and a "good for an mmo" story (really its nothing to write home about) but they did so on a terrible and rushed engine and above all else delivered this to us in a state similar to wow at its launch some eight or so years ago..you just can't do that anymore. Players will judge any new contender on how it measures against wow currently.

That said..has it made back its development cost? the exact figures are lost to me and knowing will help show if the f2p move is a last ditch to keep there game afloat, or a desperate attempt to recoup as much as they can before cutting there losses

A couple of things in response to this...

It wasn't NEARLY as bad at launch as WoW was. That's some rose colored glasses. WoW was a broken, unplayable mess at launch. Loot lag could actually freeze you in the act of looting for 20-30 MINUTES. The servers were crashing constantly, queues were hours and hours long. I remember PA retracting their GOTY recommendation until the game became halfway functional. If a game launched today with WoW's technical issues it would be laughed off the stage. The market has changed. TOR had some issues, but nothing even close to on-par with 2004 issues.

You simply cannot do a 1-1 comparison with WoW. I know the arguments about why you must, but it would take a budget of over one billion dollars to try and compete with WoW's content depth and breadth. It can't be done. No one would ever bankroll it. People need to relax their expectations of fledgling MMOs and give them a chance to grow into themselves. Sadly, in an increasingly crowded genre, games are getting less and less time to develop a following. People drop in, decry the game for 100,000 shortcomings, and bolt for "the next big thing", which is inevitably just as big a disappointment as the last. We play games that have 200-400 hours of content on display, and pronounce that there is "nothing to do". The MMO player base has become fundamentally unpleasable. It's a problem without an easy solution.

Finally, FTP is not a "last desperate act". Going FTP almost *always* results in a significant upturn in both subscribers and profit. When DDO went FTP they DOUBLED their subscriber base. Not players, subscribers. FTP is a gold mine. That is why everyone jumps on the FTP bandwagon. Not because WoW is killing them. Because they tend to make money hand over fist. Ask Nexon how FTP works for them. The problem with free to play (or "fee to play", if you will) isn't that it's the last sad gasp for dying MMOs. It's that it's kind of a player hostile model. Would you rather eat at an all you can eat buffet for $15, or have me sell you every piece of food on your plate individually? Make no mistake, EA isn't throwing up the white flag and trying to wring every last dime out of TOR. They're changing gears to a different business model because they think it will make them money. And if history is any indication, it probably will.

BloatedGuppy:
EA isn't throwing up the white flag and trying to wring every last dime out of TOR. They're changing gears to a different business model because they think it will make them money. And if history is any indication, it probably will.

Well, FTP can be consumer-friendly if done right. The problem is that it's EA and Bioware we're talking about. Now, even if we assume tha EA aren't greedy assholes, we still have to admit that they don't know jack about making games. They're businessmen, not developers, businessmen who meddle in things that shouldn't be handled by someone who thinks about games purely in terms of profit. And Bioware is a developer of single-player RPGs, it's just idiotic to expect them to handle an MMO without messing something up. I mean, look at the game - sure, it has really good class storylines (aside from Jedi Consular and Smuggler, but who plays Republic anyway?) and nice quests, but the combat mechanics are ripped straight out of WoW with hardly any changes. That may be the result of EA's meddling ("hey guys, we want you to make this game play like WoW because we need to broaden the target demographic!"), though.

What I'm trying to say is that I highly doubt that TOR will ever become a consumer-friendly FTP game.

Yellowfish:
Well, FTP can be consumer-friendly if done right.

Fair enough...let me put it this way. No developer/production company ever took their game FTP because they felt like being nice guys and giving consumers a bunch of shit for free. They did it because they saw an opportunity to improve their bottom line. "Free to Play" might be one of the most misleading monikers of all time.

DTWolfwood:
the restrictions on F2P are retarded. NO.

this, word for word.

it wasn't worth paying for the first time, not worth going back to

Nope, not going back.

Game is a boring chore to play, it takes AGES to get anywhere, it takes AGES to kill stuff...plus 90% of the fights are the same every time.

There are still few to no people to level up with through any of the planets, which means few to no people to do any of the group content.

And the big selling point, the "story" aspect was poorly done and all around lazy IMO. The alien voices, which are basically just 4 lines of gibberish repeated over and over is immersion breaking...not to mention they all have generic kill quests anyway. The story never matters after the quest it was associated with has been completed. Nobody you helped 2 planets ago is ever going to show up again to make your choices ever matter, outside of a few light/dark points.

The game is a super lazy WoW clone that spent gobs of money on voice work. Nothing more. It doesn't even deserve to be within the same realm as KOTOR.

BloatedGuppy:

Rack:
Sort of, I don't enjoy the combat/levelling so I want only to do the main story quests and some of the major sidequests. With the xp rate as it was I had to do several dozen "Kill x space weevil" quests in between the main story content.

Well come on, man. Those space weevils aren't going to kill themselves!

Really though, some of the individual quests aren't bad. A few of them are sharper/more interesting than the main stories, which can get pretty silly/bland. I do admit selling someone a main story and then gutting all the other game play by stripping out basic functionality and selling it back piecemeal is a pretty questionable business model, though.

Yeah some of them were great, but even if I did all of them I'd end up severely under-levelled. It would also get very tiresome playing alts if I wanted to see the other stories.

Question: Is there a way to earn currency in game to spend on account upgrades? That will determine whether or not I give this a shot.

The only F2P model I've seen and approve of is Turbine's DDO and LotRO. Both games have ways to earn Turbine points to spend on more content, removal of caps, etc., without having to spend cash.

I did go back and check it out, but these restrictions...ugh. I know I'm playing for free and all, but this feels more like an extended trial version of the game where you need to subscribe to get any of the good features. Reduced XP, higher shop prices, not as many quickbars,reduced crew specializations and inventory space, only two character slots- and I'm talking about a PREFERRED account here, I don't even want to know how restrictive actual F2P is. They're basically just giving you access to the story and little else. It doesn't feel like you can get even a semi-complete experience without shelling out cash.

Bioware certainly has the right to do that, but compare this to other F2P MMO's like Lord of the Rings. In there, subscribing gives you access to more quests, a higher gold limit, more character slots, and priority login. It does *not* put restrictions on basic gameplay and item management, the subscription model is really more for rewarding people who like the game enough to commit to paying annually, no more no less.

It's like...say the two games were clubs. LotRO gives subscribers access to a VIP lounge whereas ToR begrudgingly lets everyone mingle outside of the building until they pay up.

BloatedGuppy:

You simply cannot do a 1-1 comparison with WoW. I know the arguments about why you must, but it would take a budget of over one billion dollars to try and compete with WoW's content depth and breadth. It can't be done. No one would ever bankroll it. People need to relax their expectations of fledgling MMOs and give them a chance to grow into themselves.

But why should they, when WoW is already there? MMOs that launch now are competing with WoW now, if they're not capable of doing that they'll fail because everyone will go back to the better product.

Finally, FTP is not a "last desperate act". Going FTP almost *always* results in a significant upturn in both subscribers and profit. When DDO went FTP they DOUBLED their subscriber base. Not players, subscribers. FTP is a gold mine. That is why everyone jumps on the FTP bandwagon. Not because WoW is killing them.

But only after they've failed to make money on a subscriber model.

Because they tend to make money hand over fist. Ask Nexon how FTP works for them. The problem with free to play (or "fee to play", if you will) isn't that it's the last sad gasp for dying MMOs. It's that it's kind of a player hostile model.

That depends how good your F2P model is. From the sounds of it, ToRs is terrible.

See, what Free to Play is is an advertisment. You make the game free to play to convince people that it's worth spending money on for content (and you have to still have enough free to be an effective advertisement. DC Universe Online, for instance, allows you to play the full game as it was released, and buy the expansion packs seperately or subscribe to have access to all of them), convenience (characters slots, XP boosts, etc.) or customisation.

Free to Play can increase subscribers by convincing people who wouldn't even have tried the game if it wasn't free that they like it and it's worth paying for more of.

From the sounds of it though, Bioware have cut far too much out of the core experience to make the free model compelling, the XP penalty and gear prices will make later story missions frustrating because free players will be underlevelled for them, which means they will give a bad impression to those players and make them uninstall and play something else.

I want to give it another chance but the launcher is acting up. Wow! Bioware wants to make me hate them but I am still in love.

GloatingSwine:
But why should they, when WoW is already there? MMOs that launch now are competing with WoW now, if they're not capable of doing that they'll fail because everyone will go back to the better product.

To try something mechanically different? To see new lore? Experience new challenges? Play in newer, better engines? I really enjoyed WoW, but I don't load up every new game and think "Gosh, I hope they did everything WoW did!". I mean, there hasn't really been a new CRPG as good as Planescape Torment in many years. Maybe I shouldn't buy any new CRPGs! I should just play Torment over and over and over!

People go back to WoW for many reasons, and yes...content depth and system polish are amongst them...but you're underestimating plain old recidivism as well. People go back because they have an investment...of time, of money, they have friends there...it's comfortable. Some people might go back because they honestly think it's a better product, but a great many folks are kind of sick of WoW now. 8 years is a long time to play a game.

However, if our standard for new MMOs is going to be "everything WoW has and then some, but in a state of the art engine with all the modern MMO conveniences or GTFO", then the genre is finished, and we'll never see another game.

GloatingSwine:
But only after they've failed to make money on a subscriber model.

That might have been true 5 years ago. Most of the newer games have FTP or BTP baked right into them. Subscriptions are actually becoming somewhat archaic.

GloatingSwine:
That depends how good your F2P model is. From the sounds of it, ToRs is terrible.

That's true, but that has nothing to do with FTP as a concept, and everything to do with EA's fundamental misread of the market. That said, I'm willing to bet it's still successful. According to Riot, 90% of FTP profits come from 5% of the player base. Do I think this is an optimal FTP model? Certainly not. Do I think it'll be profitable anyway? I certainly do.

How is the storyline in SWTOR?

There are single-player campaigns right?

Is the story as good as the first two games or is it just some nonsense put together??

I wanted to try a new storyline, so I downloaded the client to give FTP a shot. I was a subscriber for about 4 months. When I logged in, my 6 characters were still there, but if I wanted to try a new one, I would have had to delete 5 of them because there is a 2 toon limit. Knowing how many hours I put into all of my alts in the past, I couldn't bring myself to do it so I uninstalled

I really don't like the F2P model they've implemented. Even for preferred member status it's too punishing. I really do want to experience the different class stories, but it's not worth the BS.

I really hope someone is able to figure out how to implement independent servers, so I can run my own server.

I enjoyed TOR enough but my attention span and MMO subs don't work that well together, so I was exited to see it was going F2P.
But after seeing the F2P model, I'm going with a no.

Evolutionary High:
How is the storyline in SWTOR?

There are single-player campaigns right?

Is the story as good as the first two games or is it just some nonsense put together??

Eight storylines, one for each class. I don't know if I would call them "KotOR good" as morality choices boil down to pure good vs. good evil with no middle ground whatsoever, but yeah, they're all interesting and have some great companion characters.

BloatedGuppy:

To try something mechanically different? To see new lore? Experience new challenges? Play in newer, better engines? I really enjoyed WoW, but I don't load up every new game and think "Gosh, I hope they did everything WoW did!". I mean, there hasn't really been a new CRPG as good as Planescape Torment in many years. Maybe I shouldn't buy any new CRPGs! I should just play Torment over and over and over!

Trouble is, other than setting and lore, most new MMOs actually don't offer any of those things.

However, if our standard for new MMOs is going to be "everything WoW has and then some, but in a state of the art engine with all the modern MMO conveniences or GTFO", then the genre is finished, and we'll never see another game.

Actually, I'd argue that the genre is finished for the time being. Until someone comes along and completely reinvents the way we look at the MMORPG as a concept we'll see no big new thing. DC Universe Online is a step in the right direction, it has direct player control rather than autocombat, so the actual minute to minute gameplay is more engaging, but it still has the same skinner box of looking for the man with the floating exclamation mark, beating up the requisite number of wolves, and then returning to him for XP.

Ironically, I think the next step forward is going to be a step back, to player driven content as used to exist in Ultima Online (and ironically Star Wars Galaxies) as designers and publishers gaze longingly at Minecraft. The only big MMO still doing that though is Eve, and Eve is about as newbie friendly as grizzly wrestling, so its player base is pretty much stuck.

That might have been true 5 years ago. Most of the newer games have FTP or BTP baked right into them. Subscriptions are actually becoming somewhat archaic.

The big name ones generally don't. They launch with subs, fail, and go F2P. ToR, Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online. Sure, there are smaller titles that do start out F2P, but mostly the big WoW clones are not they. Mostly it's different types of massively multiplayer games, like League of Legends and World of Tanks.

That's true, but that has nothing to do with FTP as a concept, and everything to do with EA's fundamental misread of the market. That said, I'm willing to bet it's still successful. According to Riot, 90% of FTP profits come from 5% of the player base. Do I think this is an optimal FTP model? Certainly not. Do I think it'll be profitable anyway? I certainly do.

On the other hand, 5% of Riot's playerbase is still more than ToR's subscriber base :P and that works for Riot because their F2P model is pretty good, they have a good rotation of free champions which are generally considered good well balanced ones (ToR would probably lock you to the ones everyone hated) and there's nothing you pay for that you can't earn other than customisation. (Likewise, Wargaming.net are fiddling with the premium features of World of Tanks to reduce the accusation of pay to win, premium ammo is now buyable with credits).

Zhukov:
Well, I never played it to begin with, so technically I can't "go back."

So will I give it a go for the first time now it's free? Eh... maybe.

That is pretty much my plan also. I love Star Wars (or at least I used to. Now I have a slightly less emotionally extreme, deep connection with Star Wars), but I'm not sure how I will do in this specific game.

It might very well come down to the quality of the controls and how much I can customise my character.

Are we allowed to play with every class, or are we limited to only one or two, thus hampering which stories we can experience?

EAs free to play model is a joke, they basically charge for everything. Want to use your mouse, well that is just 100 EA points, want to be able to use your right arm? An easy payment of 150 ea points etc..

The goal of Free to play is to get people to play and enjoy your game, and then buy stuff for characters that they have invested time and energy into. Not to make them look at the list of "features" you don't get and just shakes their heads and not even download the client.

Haven't played it before, but hey, they're handing down a slightly weak, grindy KotOR III with 8 storylines and no actual choice for free. There's some tradeoff there, but all in all, sounds interesting, so I'll play until I lose interest, and in all likelihood, won't spend a dime. I mean, seriously, you can take a look at free to play, and tell that they totally screwed it up, because they're bitter about actually having to shift to it. Free-to-play won't work if you go into it half-heartedly, it'll just seem to everyone that you're trying to punish the ftpers, they'll leave, and what could have been a good model will fall on its ass.

I really wanted to, but those restrictions are just too much. So it's a no go for me. It's a shame, I really did enjoy the game.

I don't care about that 2 hotbars issue. That's pretty much what I tried to do anyway. Having 40 different fucking abilities available at all times is just bad game design in my opinion.

Evolutionary High:
How is the storyline in SWTOR?

There are single-player campaigns right?

Is the story as good as the first two games or is it just some nonsense put together??

- Bland, but well done.

- Right, but you will need to do sidequests to level.

- I didn't tought the story of the first two was particulary good. This one is on the same league IMO, a bit worse at most; but feels less substancial due it's MMO nature.

Overall, if you tought the story of the first 2 was very good, i would give it a try. I know i miss my light sabers from time to time, but... mheee, planetside 2 and dota 2 are just too good.

GloatingSwine:
Trouble is, other than setting and lore, most new MMOs actually don't offer any of those things.

Sure they do. TSW and GW2 are examples of games offering new mechanical wrinkles. Even sad retreads like TERA are differentiated enough from WoW to be fundamentally different mechanical experiences. So playing them and then immediately grousing that there's only a few raids and WoW has 50, and then with the same breath complaining the industry is stagnating because everyone copies WoW...it's seriously cutting off your nose to spite your face. People need to be a little more patient. WoW had nothing on EQ, depth wise, when it launched.

GloatingSwine:
Actually, I'd argue that the genre is finished for the time being.

What you mean to say is that you are finished with the genre. Don't be one of those bloviating doomsayers on the internet who proclaims entire genres have died because you've lost interest in them. The games are still doing fine.

GloatingSwine:
Until someone comes along and completely reinvents the way we look at the MMORPG as a concept we'll see no big new thing.

Well, we won't see another WoW, but at some point people are going to need to wake up and recognize that WoW was anomalous. The circumstances that allowed for its breakaway success no longer exist.

GloatingSwine:
Ironically, I think the next step forward is going to be a step back, to player driven content as used to exist in Ultima Online (and ironically Star Wars Galaxies) as designers and publishers gaze longingly at Minecraft. The only big MMO still doing that though is Eve, and Eve is about as newbie friendly as grizzly wrestling, so its player base is pretty much stuck.

Surely there's a lot of room for innovation in this genre, but we've reached a serious stumbling block. MMOs are huge investments. Even small games are very, very costly...tens of millions in most cases, if not more, and that's for games that launch relatively content light. If the ongoing whine the moment they hit market is "Why isn't this more like WooooooooW" then you're going to see an innovation level of exactly zero. No one wants to gamble with tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars. They're going to make the most conservative, market-proven games possible, and any innovation is going to be in the form of baby steps.

GloatingSwine:
The big name ones generally don't. They launch with subs, fail, and go F2P. ToR, Age of Conan, Star Trek Online, D&D Online, Lord of the Rings Online. Sure, there are smaller titles that do start out F2P, but mostly the big WoW clones are not they. Mostly it's different types of massively multiplayer games, like League of Legends and World of Tanks.

AoC, DDO, and LOTRO are all like, 5 years old. STO is almost 3 years old. You already have industry pundits discussing whether or not the subscription is dead. Games are going to launch with FTP models built into the back end to make a smooth transition, at the very least, and most will likely have elaborate FTP trials to haul in as many initial players as possible. It's a very crowded, competitive market out there now, and most of the competition is "free". We're going to come to a point where it's go free or go home.

GloatingSwine:
On the other hand, 5% of Riot's playerbase is still more than ToR's subscriber base :P and that works for Riot because their F2P model is pretty good, they have a good rotation of free champions which are generally considered good well balanced ones (ToR would probably lock you to the ones everyone hated) and there's nothing you pay for that you can't earn other than customisation. (Likewise, Wargaming.net are fiddling with the premium features of World of Tanks to reduce the accusation of pay to win, premium ammo is now buyable with credits).

Turbine doesn't have a fraction of TOR's playerbase, and they turned a handsome profit with their FTP model (and TOR is at about 10% of LoL at present time). This isn't going to be LoL 2 or anything, LoL is a genuine phenomenon (that tends to happen when you're early to the party in a burgeoning genre). But I'm pretty sure TOR is going to make a good buck. Heck it already makes a good buck. The problem is the game was so damn expensive it needs to make a great buck.

Evolutionary High:
How is the storyline in SWTOR?

There are single-player campaigns right?

Is the story as good as the first two games or is it just some nonsense put together??

Decent enough compared to the first one. Less what-the-fuck than the second, in both good and bad ways. Padded as a motherfuck compared to either of them, though.

"back"? no. I can't go back to a game I never subscribed to, nor would I.

The gameplay isn't much better/worse than the other Old Republic games, and the stories I've seen so far were... pretty "meh", tbh. Now that its what it should have been in the first place, a multiplayer-enabled KOTOR sequel, I'm interested to play it to the end to see how this sh*t fits togther. ...but there's no way I'd pay a subscription for that.

Actually, Bioware, I might have been convinced to pay $60-ish (average retail price for a new console game) for the game instead of paying the subscription, but alas...

Soviet Heavy:
Are we allowed to play with every class, or are we limited to only one or two, thus hampering which stories we can experience?

You're able to choose any class, however you're limited to 2 characters at any given time. To experience all of the class stories you would have to delete a character after you've completed their story.

Finished the story lines of the Trooper and Jedi Knight, and beat all the operations on hard mode, so.... no. I enjoyed the time I spent there, but there's too many restrictions with their F2P model. Just ain't worth my time.

I would encourage other people to check it out, though. At least for a little bit. The story lines are interesting, but I don't know how much the new restrictions will dampen the experience.

As a guy who's only prior experience in MMOs is a few hours of GW2 (before deciding I hated it), I'm enjoying the f2p. I'm sure my inexperience is benefitting me, as I really don't even know what I'm missing. I only care about playing the story and then quitting. So far, I'd say its on par in that regard with the first KotOR. The first had a decent story and a magnificent twist (and some extreme as hell morality). Now I am still angry about how they handled the Exile and KotOR II's fantastic story in general. But free game is free.

Haven't made it through all 8 stories yet, so yes. This is just a really long KotOR 3 for me. MMORPGs hold no appeal for me anyway... but this one's decent single player, so long as you collapse the chat log.

No, while I thought the first arc for the smuggler was absolutely amazing, the 2nd arc just bored me to death. It's like yay you defeated this guy who has been a giant pain in the ass since the beginning, you gained a bunch of allies and you found one of the long lost treasures....and now we're just going to throw a faceless villain at you! Who is he and why should you care? Because we said so.
The story/missions just got to a point where I stopped caring and got bored.

Go back?

God no!
The game got really old really fast.

I'm not from the America, so I don't have hyper broadband from space, and the client for that game is freakin' gimungous (not a real word) so No I won't even try it now it's 'free'.

BloatedGuppy:

Sure they do. TSW and GW2 are examples of games offering new mechanical wrinkles. Even sad retreads like TERA are differentiated enough from WoW to be fundamentally different mechanical experiences. So playing them and then immediately grousing that there's only a few raids and WoW has 50, and then with the same breath complaining the industry is stagnating because everyone copies WoW...it's seriously cutting off your nose to spite your face. People need to be a little more patient. WoW had nothing on EQ, depth wise, when it launched.

Mostly though even though their mechanics are different they still have the same skinner boxes of either quest-reward-next quest whilst levelling and raid raid raid when you hit the cap. That's something that also needs to change before anyone really pays attention to a new MMORPG.

What you mean to say is that you are finished with the genre. Don't be one of those bloviating doomsayers on the internet who proclaims entire genres have died because you've lost interest in them. The games are still doing fine.

They're puttering along, but the era of growth (Everquest had more players than UO, WoW had more than EQ) is over, and new products are launching that are having an increasing amount of trouble making back their budget. Despite having more interesting quests than anything else that aren't punching 20 wolves no-one wanted to play it. Or, at least, pay to play it. When people left EQ they picked up WoW, but people aren't leaving WoW to a new MMO, they're leaving MMOs completely, WoW has bled something like 5 million subs from its peak, but they haven't gone to any other MMOs.

Surely there's a lot of room for innovation in this genre, but we've reached a serious stumbling block. MMOs are huge investments. Even small games are very, very costly...tens of millions in most cases, if not more, and that's for games that launch relatively content light. If the ongoing whine the moment they hit market is "Why isn't this more like WooooooooW" then you're going to see an innovation level of exactly zero. No one wants to gamble with tens of millions or hundreds of millions of dollars. They're going to make the most conservative, market-proven games possible, and any innovation is going to be in the form of baby steps.

Yep. And we're repeatedly seeing that that just isn't working well enough. EA/Bioware spent basically infinity money on ToR shooting for WoW's market and haven't captured it. They may get some return on investment from it, but it's going to be nowhere near what they wanted and it's really going to sour people on the idea of spending all that money again. The big players are going to look at ToR and think "it's not worth it". That's why the genre in its current form has reached it's end, the huge investment required to make and launch a MMORPG does not pay the kind of returns a major publisher is going to want for it.

You say there's not going to be "another WoW", but there's another dimension to that, WoW's massive playerbase is actually an added value of that game, it means that there's always someone to play with, there's always a guild there that fits the style of play and level of commitment that any player is willing to put into the game, it populates the auction houses and keeps the economy moving, means that the world and instanced PvP always has matches going, etc. A massively fragmented market of many smaller MMOs simply will not have that value.

It's possible that the market will develop in the direction seen in Halting State, (and also maybe For The Win, don't remember that detail) where your account is actually transferrable between games, so that the value you have in your level 90 in WoW is actually mappable to another game and you can move as freely between games as you can now between servers on a specific game. (There is going to be some level of interconnectedness between Wargaming.net's range, certainly at an individual level, probably gold and maybe free XP will transfer between World of Tanks and World of Warplanes/Warships when they come out, and maybe also in clan wars)

AoC, DDO, and LOTRO are all like, 5 years old. STO is almost 3 years old. You already have industry pundits discussing whether or not the subscription is dead. Games are going to launch with FTP models built into the back end to make a smooth transition, at the very least, and most will likely have elaborate FTP trials to haul in as many initial players as possible. It's a very crowded, competitive market out there now, and most of the competition is "free". We're going to come to a point where it's go free or go home.

Yeah, though we have Secret World and Tera launching with fees. TSW at least is not doing well, despite not being as hugely boring as Age of Conan was at launch people don't think it's worth a sub.

Turbine doesn't have a fraction of TOR's playerbase, and they turned a handsome profit with their FTP model (and TOR is at about 10% of LoL at present time). This isn't going to be LoL 2 or anything, LoL is a genuine phenomenon (that tends to happen when you're early to the party in a burgeoning genre). But I'm pretty sure TOR is going to make a good buck. Heck it already makes a good buck. The problem is the game was so damn expensive it needs to make a great buck.

Again, Turbine have a good F2P model, ToR doesn't, and even if they get a spike from going F2P they won't keep it because the free model is so restrictive and terrible that it will actively drive players away. (Also, EA would kill to have 10% of LoL's numbers, LoL has 12 million unique active players per day on 35-40 million accounts). World of Tanks has about 4 million weekly and they're starting to actively court the chinese market (LoL gets a massive chunk of its playerbase in southeast asia, where the paradigm of gaming is different and F2P is much bigger).

Nope. When they pay me to play it, I might consider it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked