Why don't once insanly popular games go F2P instead of die?

[imaheadcase]

I was thinking of Dark Age of camelot, how popular it was at one time..has about 1-2k playing it now vs the 250k at peak. Why don't they go to a F2P game?

I constantly read about "DAOC had the best pvp ever" comments on forums.

Here is what i noticed so far about daoc vs newer games.

1. Graphics wise its still on par with lots of MMO out and about. Take popular WoW, its just as good with all the expansions (artstyle not going into that area)
2. Gameplay is fantastic, huge openworld, huge pvp area, rvr.
3. Has best of both worlds, pve if you into that, PvP if you are into that, "battlegrounds" if you like that..Plus RvR..DAOC poster child of success.
The only reason subscription fell off over 10 years was simply so many games on market saturated subs.

Free to play I think would surge this game back to popular f2p game. Anyone else think so?

 

[AndroidVageta]

I think A LOT of MMO's should be F2P...but the problem with that is where is the money to keep the servers up...to keep the game updated...to pay the employees??? These things just dont pay for themselves...

 

[Elcs]

I think A LOT of MMO's should be F2P...but the problem with that is where is the money to keep the servers up...to keep the game updated...to pay the employees??? These things just dont pay for themselves...

Typical MMO's are about $15 per month.

To address the money side of things:

Instead of going F2P, reduce the monthly cost to say $5. If you triple your subscriber base then you are going to be pulling in the same amount of money

Microtransactions - I hate them but it's a way of introducing more money into the game.

Perhaps combining those two measures would greatly enhance the member base of a flagging or once great MMO and maybe even make it more profitable.

The issue with reviving an old, nearly dead MMO is that you'd mainly appeal to the current fanbase who are already playing the game. Most of your old subscribers have been there, done that, got the t-shirt and the have never subscribed players are generally looking for the newer game and not an older, over the hill and no longer popular MMO.

One of the biggest buzz kills in an MMO is the lack of players on a server.

 

[imaheadcase]

I don't think it would just appeal to just current subscribers. The reason many left was just so much other MMO released within 10 years, they just moved on.

Cost is not a major issue to, since most the programmers, servers are already on staff as it is (EA games is huge as it is), including the fact the game is so mature you would not need lots to maintain it.

They could make a market for potions/armor pretty easily, since crafting is in game already. They could simply remove it and make a market for that stuff. Lots of ways to go about it.

Sure former players moved on, but the appeal of the game is still there, people just don't justify paying $15 a month for it anymore. But it is worth it for free.

 

[SunnyD]

Because it's relatively unknown territory for most companies. They simply don't know or understand how to monetize a game properly in order to maintain the title without subscription revenue coming in. Not to mention, the successful F2P games still generally use the limited F2P experience in a similar manner as an "extended limited trial", as a hook to get you into subscriptions. A lot of companies also look at F2P as going to cannibalize their existing dwindling subscriber income further. And lastly, if F2P was restrictive, could you imagine the uproar of the existing player base if they were ported over to the F2P model without taking into account the years of subscription fees they've paid in?

Simply put, a lot of companies simply haven't designed their game around this model, and would need to take an extraordinary amount of development effort to move in that direction which many companies would feel is better put towards the next content update in the hopes of reviving sagging subscription income. In other words, it's just not as easy as you think it would be.

And Dark Age of Cameltwat's PvP wasn't "all that". It was basically a clusterfuck of lag and choppy graphics with roving gank groups and ever powerful assassin classes.

 

[tk149]

Turbine transitioned Dungeons and Dragons Online to F2P.
http://www.ddo.com

However, there was a significant investment of programming time involved in the transition.

There was a huge influx of new people. Turbine is now beta testing F2P for Lord of the Rings Online, so I guess the F2P model was successful.

http://www.lotro.com/betasignup/



Does anyone have a list of other MMORPG's that switched from subscription to F2P?

 

[dfuze]

I never did play DAoC, but it looked good. I just never liked the idea of paying $15 a month for a game + the game itself. F2P and microtransactions I could live with, or even $5 a month fees.

 

[zerogear]

I agree, it should either be subscription + free game, instead of having to buy the game and also pay for subscription

 

[Homerboy]

I agree, it should either be subscription + free game, instead of having to buy the game and also pay for subscription

I've said this since day one of MMOPRGs

 

[VashHT]

It would be great if DaOC went f2p, it seems like companies are realizing that it can work really well with D&D and LOTRO going F2P. If GW2 is as popular as the first game that may help steer more companies towards F2P as well.

 

[imaheadcase]

Because it's relatively unknown territory for most companies. They simply don't know or understand how to monetize a game properly in order to maintain the title without subscription revenue coming in. Not to mention, the successful F2P games still generally use the limited F2P experience in a similar manner as an "extended limited trial", as a hook to get you into subscriptions. A lot of companies also look at F2P as going to cannibalize their existing dwindling subscriber income further. And lastly, if F2P was restrictive, could you imagine the uproar of the existing player base if they were ported over to the F2P model without taking into account the years of subscription fees they've paid in?

Simply put, a lot of companies simply haven't designed their game around this model, and would need to take an extraordinary amount of development effort to move in that direction which many companies would feel is better put towards the next content update in the hopes of reviving sagging subscription income. In other words, it's just not as easy as you think it would be.

And Dark Age of Cameltwat's PvP wasn't "all that". It was basically a clusterfuck of lag and choppy graphics with roving gank groups and ever powerful assassin classes.

Lag game and choppy graphics? Never really had that happen, unless it was 200+ rvr raid on relics. But that was a rare event if you could be on when that happen. lol

Like i said, DAOC only has 1-2k subs, it would not be a huge loss to them, they would easily reap that back for more subs in f2p items.

 

[SunnyD]

Turbine transitioned Dungeons and Dragons Online to F2P.
http://www.ddo.com

However, there was a significant investment of programming time involved in the transition.

There was a huge influx of new people. Turbine is now beta testing F2P for Lord of the Rings Online, so I guess the F2P model was successful.

http://www.lotro.com/betasignup/



Does anyone have a list of other MMORPG's that switched from subscription to F2P?

One thing to keep in mind that with DDO and especially the upcoming LOTRO "F2P" scheme, if you really and truly want to play the game without any hinderence at all, you'll still "subscribe" to the game. Both of them have a top tier player account type which is still subscription based.

 

[TridenT]

Typical MMO's are about $15 per month.

To address the money side of things:

Instead of going F2P, reduce the monthly cost to say $5. If you triple your subscriber base then you are going to be pulling in the same amount of money

They might get triple the subscriber base and pull in the same money, but their costs will go up as well.

 

[SunnyD]

One real problem I have with microtransaction funded games is permanence. Particularly, those "items" that enable you to do a specific yet critical function within the game world itself, but are limited in duration - forcing you to buy it over and over and over again.

Now in a way, this would benefit casual gamers greatly, but for those that play often, this gets expensive, and is no different than paying a subscription. Except it has the added annoyance of expiring far more often. To me, that just sucks.

 

[coloumb]

Free to play I think would surge this game back to popular f2p game. Anyone else think so?

There is a 14 day free trial - if that doesn't help subscriptions - F2P won't.

F2P is nice..but it's very limited in what you can and can't do. I went back to DDO when they enabled F2P and there were quite a few things which required "credits" in order to enjoy more of the game.

 

[NinjaCat]

I agree with the lower sub, getting more subs at the lower cost will bring in more numbers, this will bring in more people, which makes the servers more lively, which hopefully if your game is any good will keep those players. $15 a month seems pretty steep if you have to pay like $180 a year, but a lower sub that would turn into $50-70 a year(the price of a new game), more people will be willing to pay that. I think a demo area along with a low sub will bring in more players.

 

[Wardawg1001]

Shadowbane is an MMO that went from subscription to F2P. That change was more due to the quickly dwindling player base and (in my opinion) the realization that the game was never going to be free of its many bugs and server side issues. It continued on F2P for several years and only shut down fairly recently. Its now being re-built as an emulator by its loyal fanbase.

For those interested: http://shadowbaneemulator.com/