Feldon 
From Massively:
Like it or not, free-to-play is rapidly coming to dominate every corner of the gaming industry. While that’s good on the surface, it also blurs the line between business and design, and it creates a lot of tension for both consumers and developers who are increasingly faced with the challenges inherent in separating monetary decisions from gameplay decisions.
One of the more interesting GDC 2012 round-tables featured Sony Online Entertainment executive producer Dave Georgeson, NCSoft publishing director Steve Levy, Perfect World VP John Young, GamersFirst monetization director Joe Willmon, and Digi-Capital Limited managing director Tim Merel, all of whom convened for a mind-meld on successfully migrating subscription games to F2P.
Dave “SmokeJumper” Georgeson had this to say:
“as soon as you get somebody to buy something once, the seal is broken. And that game is where the real magic is in this space. And after they’ve bought something, they stay. And when they stay, they spend. Our job is still to entertain, though. We’re still bards; we run out there and dance, sing, and make people have a good time, and if we don’t do that, we don’t make a dime.”
Georgeson cautioned. “[Players] universally hate change. They’ve spent so much time learning how to play [that] they don’t want to have to relearn that stuff again; it irritates the crap out of them, and it’s totally understandable. So the first thing you have to do is try to understand how this is going to be good for them. What they need to understand is that this is a win all the way around. This is not just a win for us,” Georgeson explained. “From a player perspective, I don’t know why anybody resists free-to-play. I just don’t get it. From a player perspective, you don’t pay a dime if you don’t like it. The onus of proof is entirely on the developer.”
“We have to make our games different though, for free-to-play, because the way we used to make them doesn’t work,” he finished.
Continue reading Publishing Heavies Weigh In on F2p Conversions @ Massively
Well Dave, here is a clue!
Existing players resist F2P wholeheartedly because they KNOW that the game in its’ entirety will suffer at the expense of valuable and skilled developer resource being retasked to produce tat instead of entertaining content. If you really need any evidence, join a raid guild anon and see what the feelings are and actually EXPERIENCE the end result of endless production of tat week in, week out. Only then will you see why long term players are so annoyed.
If you really wanted success, you would hire ADDITIONAL resource as an INVESTMENT. Then you would attract players with the game content and make money with the tat. Then we might ALL be happy!
I don’t mind change. I mind no change in my mmo.
Secondly, he kinda joke about getting loot himself.. “That’s what MMO’s have devolved into.”
Technically, giving me visually appearance gear in a instant feeder format is much less desirable to me that putting behind at least some new content. At least that way i can play the game and continually be rewarded.
Instead of selling me wings, but them in a new adventure pack with some creative effort behind it. Sure, it takes you “the developer” longer to do that. But, you’ve also served a large audience. Correct me here if others feel differently.
I love you and make art every week and sell it, I’d prefer you take a little more effort and put that art wrap it in some content, give me some branching content and say hey wings are here. But now you have to go back . Buy this dungeon for 2000 sc. I’d buy the content if i wanted the wings and it was interesting content. Again, just my opinion what do others think?
Every time Dave speaks it reminds me of listening to phone companies feeding me lines.
Like how its good they raised my rates because it’s paying for buildout and/or upgrades to their infrastructure that will in the end provide better service. Or how its good that cell phone data plans are capped because it means the heavy users don’t drive up the costs of the average user. The rub is…they are all lies. They are spin! The long and the short of it is that SOE (and other companies) can get A LOT more money out of us if they nickel and dime us to death. Is that bad? Meh! I don’t know…but as F2P has hit EQ2 we have seen new levels of problems and new levels of less content.
Is that because of F2P or is F2P because as the game ages there is less financial desire to fix stuff and to make new content make both F2P and the games decline a result of the natural life cycle of the game? We’ll never know because it wold be dumb for them to tell us, but either way I’ve stopped paying squat for the game.
I’m not sure where he gets this idea that F2P uniquely rewards developers for making a good game.
Subscriptions serve that function too: Good game, more subs; bad game, less subs. I would argue that the subscription model does a better job of it, since player spending under a sub model is motivated entirely by whether or not they want to keep playing, whereas under the F2P model player spending is motivated additionally by competitive urges and whatnot.
I don’t like to assume that people are being dishonest, but this seems so simple that I have to wonder if he really believes what he’s saying here. I must be missing something.
The F2P model is a bigger hook to get people in is all. I don’t care if it is F2P or subs. I like the hybrid model they are doing now. As long as content is released then I don’t care about the fluff. Of course they are all trying to find out how to ring more money out of the players. That is there job. We all knew smokeblower was hired to do that and this article cleary shows that. Guess we will see how far they try and push it. Hopefully they will put out good content that we are willing to pay for. Time will tell.
F2P sounds nice in the beginning, but as others have pointed out, game development resources and content development suffers.
I was really sad to see SJ get promoted within SOE, I guess the old addage holds true- “F##k Up and Move Up”
Hopefully they will allow Holly to do something meaningful with EQ2, but as it stands now, sun has set on this once great title.
From my perspective, FTP means a lower quality gaming experience, because its all about how much fluff they can crank out to sell. Game content, game quality goes by the wayside.
You really do get what you pay for.
I’ve almost completely checked out of eq2. I tiered down to silver. I have social reasons to stay such as my ties to guilds and players, but other then that I’ve gone back to the game I used to play before I bought any games from the eq franchise; Anarchy Online. And I pay my monthly fee over there to have access to expansion content. One can only take so much bad before it’s time to withdraw.
I don’t believe in f2p period. Poor game, poor content etc etc.
The issue today is that there are TOO many mmo’s out there. New games coming out can’t hope to compete. There are a few exceptions but they are just that; exceptions. People tend to stick with what they started with. That’s the ONLY reason I am still attached to Norrath and usually find my way back even against my better judgement. Sure, people will quit temporarily for the new game of the month but they almost always come back home. When dealing with WoW’s millions of players that’s very daunting to a new game/company.
So if a game goes FTP, people are far more likely to give your game a try than if they have to pay a lump fee AND a subscription. Even if they cant keep people full time, they can still have a chance to suck a few dollars out of someone through cash shops versus nothing at all if they had to resubscribe. I still think their number 1 priority is to make a good game and keep it good; then you wont have any problems. But paying $15 a month for this game and $15 for that one and $15 for those other 4 all adds up and when people have to cut back they will always keep the one they know is good.
I’m not saying I am a fan but I do see why they are doing it.
Georgeson cautioned. “[Players] universally hate change.”
Big difference between good and bad change!
Its clear the market is saturated but for me surely going down the F2P route is not the way to go,at least in a game thats established it sends out the message that game is failing to me but from the off i can see the appeal.
But SJ has represented the worst time in EQ2 history for me the sheer lack of content has been a body blow to the game one i suspect it may never recover from and for the fact,not the rampant march of the F2P model he will be remembered long after the game has died.
@Nyna: Are you Dave posting under a false name?
“I just don’t get it.”
Yes, Dave, we are painfully aware that you don’t get it.
I swear, the people that go to this year’s fanfare need to make t-shirts with Dave’s face and this quote under it.
* trolling removed*
why would you go to fanfare and try to harass SJ – one of the few guys in SOE who’s doing a good job?
Oh Nyna..
I’m not going to spend time correcting you or getting into a clawing, scratching catfight. What would be the point in that, hmm? I’m sure Feldon doesn’t need that here.
Perhaps you are right though. Perhaps Dave is the next Coming. Maybe the rest of world just hasn’t seen it and you are correct. Actually, now that I think on it, Dave has been doing an amazing job over there. The F2P shift has been a success and all the loyal fans that have built EQ2 since it launched 8 years ago are amazingly grateful for the switch in gaming models. Under Dave’s glorious regime, the quality of content and bug-free feature release has reached a height and depth never before seen in SOE’s history. What’s that, you say? I agree! The communication levels are amazing! Every honeyed, truthful word that floats from Dave’s lips or that takes written form should be taken as gospel.
Man, you were right Nyna. Dave’s a star.
Rugrat, you are wrong, completely wrong. TRhe F2P model has proven itself over and over, to the tune of billions of dollars the psat decade. Games like DDO would not exist today if not for Free to Play, let alone actually release expansions again. Anarchy Online would have ceased to operate 7 years ago, but instead F2P or FROOB as they call it stopped that, and the game prospered, releasing 4 more expansions under FROOB and funding the development of AOC and Secret World.
I can go on and list 50+ products that are Free to Play that would not exist today with out it. EQ2, was saved by Freeport Server … I know you will never admit it, but the game has a future today only because of Free to Play. Period.
Rugrat is right. If you aren’t willing to put a little money in play single player games. One person complaining about cost ruins it for everyone else.
“From a player perspective, I don’t know why anybody resists free-to-play. I just don’t get it.”
“We have to make our games different though, for free-to-play, because the way we used to make them doesn’t work.”
Truly a mystery for the ages. I just hope Vanguard has a little “way we used to make them” left when they’re done converting it 2 FtP.
Aethn Said
“Games like DDO would not exist today if not for Free to Play, let alone actually release expansions again.”
F2P has also been a model for game who can not make it… low quality. Which popular game starts out F2p? WOW and SWTOR both are both subbed games. Atuff like free trials still lets people get chances at gameplay.
Saev
@Aethan: You are only telling part of a story. Are F2P models successful? Absolutely. Look at all the games out there happily micro-transactioning their player bases to rake in substantially more than a monthly sub would normally have brought in. We agree here, right? F2P works.
There is the other side of F2P, and while not universal, it is the majority. That side is where the weight of Dev resources is put into what earns the company more money. Right now, for EQ2, Dave has moved the bar to about 90% fluff and 10% real content. He’s too far over on his lucrative SC cow right now that he’s not seeing why so many people aren’t happy. To quote, “I just don’t get it.”. I think this is where you fit in as well. You don’t get why there is discontent with all of this.
You see, he’s cheapened the game. Ogres have wings, pink unicorns flit around the countryside, and all the best appearance gear and items are no longer available in game from crafter’s, they are available for $$. Additionally, “features” that are brought into the game are not specifically designed to funnel you into the SC store to get you to spend even more (Dungeon Decorator).
So, its not so much that its F2P that’s the kicker, its how Dave is going about it to make the most money in a very short time. EQ2 is an old game, and its players are being manipulated to pay way more than the standard monthly sub for fluffy crap so that other games can get a steady influx of cash flow. He’s turned a once classy game into a cheap, street-walking harlot that does anything now to bring in the $$.
To add to what Saev said, even older MMOs like Anarchy Online still have a monthly fee. Sure AO has a f2p option but you are severely limited by 75% of the game (can’t play expansion content). EVE and Dark Age of Camelot still charge a monthly fee. All very old games that are still living strong with a dedicated playerbase.
I’ve seen some promising games fail miserably because they released as a f2p game. Earth Eternal being a prime example.
Aethin, I’ve been reading about Secret World for years; Is it here yet?
You managed to miss most of what I actually said. Yes, f2p makes billions. From games that are superficial simply because of the cash shops. Instant gratification.
Those things do nothing to flesh out a game with content nor depth nor gameplay. And when f2p is forced upon a successful franchise that already has that depth and content, the future for it is sealed. Content and depth will suffer at the expense of tat. The franchise per se will fall into complete disrepair and current content that has already been paid for will not materialise simply because it’s better for the accountants to produce SC wings and mounts and endless tat for instant grats.
Unfortunately, when you intro microtrans into an established franchise, you have huge conflicts, all the attention span challenged players will want to play to win and the established players will hate it. So all you can make and sell is tat that has no effect on the game but a huge effect on your balance sheet.
The net effect is that you now own a shop selling useless rubbish and your established player base will leech and leech away until you are left with nothing but to sell ringtones to kids.
You actually missed the most important thing that I said. Sony had a huge opportunity here; introduce RMT by ADDING resources to nickel and dime the susceptible and use your existing SKILLED resources to add depth and content and enable the best things about EQ2 to persist rather than die a death of 1000 RMT’s
You see, he’s cheapened the game. Ogres have wings, pink unicorns flit around the countryside, and all the best appearance gear and items are no longer available in game from crafter’s, they are available for $$.
Bingo. Used to be you actually group up with people to go through content to get a neat mount or ingredients for crafting or the “best” appearance gear. Now you click buy. Honestly, I’m as upset about that as getting weekly store updates as reminders that we have had 6-8+ months between adventuring content updates.
Hell, I’ll take adventure packs like The Bloodline Chronicles(with mono-textured walls[snicker]), Splitpaw Saga, and Fallen Dynasty and fill those with art and sell that to me for $20 bucks. I’m sure even the casuals will divert from tradeskilling to get the some appearance gear. Example: folks did dungeon maker jussst enough to get the green glowie horse mount. Some still do it some don’t.
All that being said, I do see results in Planetside 2. So /rant.
@Eschia: This is tangential, but I have to say that Earth Eternal’s failure wasn’t caused by the model. There were a lot of factors, which I’m resisting the urge to write about at length since this is an EQ2 site, but F2P wasn’t one of them.
I paid for sony games for years and did not mind at all.
then they lied to everyone and sold us out like a bunch of livestock.
they need to understand that some of us are human beings not livestock.
But that will never happen.
And dave said the following “”That is what MMOs have devolved into,” Georgeson laughed.”
I got to say that is exactly what has happened with eq2, we have devolved into the give it to me now crowd with the store.
Folks like me don’t buy stuff in the store, we don’t roll that way the new generation is here and that is what SOE is shooting for the 10-14 crowd of give it to me now.
I got to say that entire article wanted to make me throw up, at least I know why now Dave has destroyed eq2 he wants to be like the rest of the Korean/German games of instant gratification, and cash shop
If that is the way that gaming is going then I probably will just go back to the rpg/fps shooters and not worry about it.
Well in these comments we see the charm that divides the casual/low playtime EQ2 players and the hardcore/high playtime players, these two groups do NOT want the same thing from the developers, unfortunately SJ does not say what target group they are developing the game for nowadays, but it is pretty obvious if you look at what SJ has written and see what the actual design decisions are.
From my point of wiev EQ2 started to (unintentionally I hope) loose the casual/low playtime subscribers around TSO, yes for many it was a great expansion but for many of us it was horrible, an expansion that actively excluded you “you can not do this because you do not have t2” “You can not get into any groups as you do not . . .” and if you did get a group you got kicked fast as you did not know the dance (and this is not a discussion if it actually was that way, it felt that way to me and others, those of you that played the last two years may have more input on when the larger numbers of casual players left).
So due to unintentional design decisions attitudes in the player base the casual players start to leave, the players that are left are not many enough to keep the business going at a desired level, so they have to do something, they choose FTP (I would have preferred an hourly sub or a tiered sub).
I think that the current status of EQ2 is the result of a lot of players that me that have said “I am not playing $ 14,99 a month for a game where I can not reach my goals, access lots of the content and have fun” so SOE changed it, you are free to dislike it but the talk about “all the loyal customers ” and their expectations sounds a bit hollow.
Due to several reasons the “loyal paying player base” became to small, the reasons are not FTP or other common complaints the reasons are previous expansions and player attitudes, there are however enough of me and my wife and people like us and the game is obviously designed with customers like us in mind. Would it be more honest if Windstalker or SJ wrote a producers letter and talked about who the target player is? Absolutely, could they have done things differently? Absolutely (something like Rifts Chronicles and Instant adventures would have been better to attract and keep the casual players, but it is debatable how well received that would have been by some of the other players).
SAEV , free to Play has been used in teh Asdian markets for more then a decade now, for hunfreds of games, many of which have millions of paying users. They were built from teh ground upi as Free to play and are highly successful in the regions they are played, ie Korea, China, Japan and others.
Free to Play was adopted in the Western Hemisphere just recently as a means to regenerate some of th older games, like DDO. SOE and other comapnaies now build NEW games from the group up with Free to Play as the only financial model in mind. Games like Free Realms and others are very successful todaya nd were built from the instant they were invisioned as Free to Play.
You guys are all talking about the single smallest Free to Play market in teh industry, North America. Free to Play or Microtransactrion games have existed for more then a decade all across the globe with tremendous success.
Here on the NA side of the world, Ultima Online chose to go with a subscription based service, not Ala-Carte, by doing so it set teh standard for NA games as being teh first mainstream MMO to really hit the markeet, everyone followed suit.
This is the same country that still uses the SAE measuring system instead of Metrics for no better then ego to be honest. The entire world uses metrics, even our science community here at home uses metrics. Its the same as F2P, we dont like it because we simply dont want to change and honestly have no real legitimate excuse to support it.
Simply put, people hate F2P models for the simple reason that its been like this since they can remember and damned if they are going ot change now, even if the sub model drives studios out of buisness.
@Aethn:
“Simply put, people hate F2P models for the simple reason that its been like this since they can remember and damned if they are going ot change now, even if the sub model drives studios out of buisness.”
Uhm, no. You see, you need to listen to the other half of the discussion to understand what is being said, and you are not doing that. What you are doing here is echoing Dave’s comments and making baseless generalizations.
I would elaborate more on why people don’t like F2P, but its all been said ad nauseum. Its up to you to understand or not. Either way you are one person, but a person that Dave finds very attractive for his new demographic. Good luck with that.
Wanda — The big other big thing that people seem to conveniently gloss over is, if you dont like what Free to play offers, keep paying for your subscription. The part about SOE’s system, that most other companies do not do is they also offer the option to continue to play as a subscriber, with virtually no change to your gameplay.
So the arguement is moot, if you personally dont like F2P, dont use it, keep paying $14,99 a month. The game will not change for you. Actually that is false, you see as a side effect the game does change for subscribers, they get a much larger and healthier playerbase per server to play alongside.
Arguing about how evil F2P is, is pointless, it IS the financial model of the future for the entire industry.
And to point out from a previous poster that WoW and SWTOR are not F2P, I will add that both companies are offering NEW titles that are infact Free to Play models or DLC content models on console. Diablo III is a great example, they are even allowiong players to buy and sell, yes SELL items ingame for real life CASH.
WoW will be Free to Play, once Blizzard decides it is time to spend the $10+ million to covert to the new billing system across dozens of countries. The have infact already added a ingame currency like Station Cash last month to facilitate this move, It is called “Battle.net Balance”. Once Diablo III ships and the Alla Carte model they have chosen for the game is bug free, expect to see it moved over to WoW and “Titan” by years end and free to play announced.
Aethin, you’re still ignoring what Wanda and I said…
“they also offer the option to continue to play as a subscriber, with virtually no change to your gameplay”
You are absoulutely right there so far – there has been no change to gameplay because there has been NO new content (except for Drunder) which has been artificially locked BECAUSE it is not finished BECAUSE the devs are busy making marketplace TAT BECAUSE that is where the money is.
Tat kills content and ultimately the game – this might not be so in a game that starts out f2p but it is entirely the opposite for EQ2.
I hear what you are saying about asian f2p models etc but anyone I have spoken to complain that they are simply grindfests with tat and no depth – which would you rather play?
The problem with Dave “SmokeJumper” Georgeson‘s rhetoric which you are faithfully regurgitating is that it does not reflect actual measurable changes to the game, or the success of the console industry.
EQ2 used to cost $14.99 a month, with a $40 expansion once per year. For that price, we got a fixed amount of content, updates, and tweaks throughout the year. It wasn’t always a lot of content, but SOE got their Christmas bonus to the tune of thousands of players buying their expansions (usually $40 retail boxes of which SOE only got to keep about $25).
In 2011, EQ2 cost $14.99 a month, plus $40 for the Destiny of Velious expansion, plus $40 for the Age of Discovery expansion (sold almost entirely via online shop meaning SOE kept virtually the entire $80 for those who went along with SOE’s double dip). Meanwhile, what those who gushingly talk about the wonders of Free-to-Play tend to gloss over, is that every week, like clockwork, new items have been added to the StationCash Marketplace. Yes, there’s plenty of fluff, but many of these are items that players have requested over the years (ie racial armors) and which should be INCLUDED in the subscription price.
I have it from a former SOE source that when SOE President John Smedley heard about Lord of the Rings going Free-to-Play, he couldn’t send an e-mail fast enough to all the EQ2 top people stating “I want EQ2 free-to-play on all servers. Get it done.” It took a tremendous amount of hand-holding from EQ2 producers to talk him off that ledge and to make it a one server “experiment” rather than the all-servers-immediately “nuclear” option.
How quickly people forget that it was Smedley’s impulsive directive to add Battlegrounds to EQ2 after having extensively played them in World of Warcraft (that WoW is one of his favorite MMOs is one of the worst kept secrets in the biz) which derailed an already behind-schedule Sentinel’s Fate expansion.
I ask: If Free-to-Play were the unequivocal future of gaming, then why aren’t XBox 360, PS3, or Wii dead? Much of the content on XBox 360 these days is in the walled garden of Xbox Live which requires a $70 annual subscription.
So Aethn, I don’t think it can be argued that Free-to-Play has provided an infusion of new players, some of whom have chosen to stick around. But I also don’t think it can be argued that we are paying more for less these days. Free-to-Play is built on the premise that satisfying the existing customer base is impossible (an oft-repeated mantra of SOE fanboys), so the only means of survival is to attract the attention of MMO tourists.
Discussion is good. However, straw man arguments such as suggesting that people who have problems with Free-to-Play are just averse to new things, or suggesting that F2P has “no effect” on the base game will continue to be challenged.
Interesting about Smedley — makes perfect sense. I absolutely love the phrase “MMO tourism”! I don’t know if you coined that yourself, Feldon, or it’s been in play, but what a great phrase to sum up what FTP is about. Great commentary.
The recent issue of Game Informer (which I quoted in a later discussion here as well) has an interview with Scott Hartsman, where he says Rift currently has no plans to go to FTP. I have known Scott for a long time, and he NEVER puts his foot in his mouth or says the wrong thing — so he will never say he won’t do it, but here’s what he said:
“At this point in time, the game is doing really well with it’s subscription model … [going free to play] depends on any number of things. What’s the competitive landscape look like? What kind of gamer’s attention are you looking for? …While barrier reduction is an important thing to us, for the moment we are focusing more on the technology side than the business model side.”
What I find most interesting about this is he suggests that an FTP audience is different than a subscription based audience. What competitive landscape is SOE playing in? It also has to do with barrier reduction, but again, what kind of players do you wish to attract by taking down initial financial barriers? As Feldon said, it attracts MMO tourists, who are not in the game for serious character progression over a long period of time. I think they hope everyone will go to gold, but it’s certainly not required. So where does that leave raiding guilds that need new players to fill out a raid force, even x2 raiders, like my guild, currently?
Well first off I had taken a 2 year away from EQ2 to play lotro. I was in alfa 14 all the way to when it went free to play. Lotro was in its death throws, I have no idea of how its doing now, I don’t even care. I watched our largest guild on brandy wine implode after free to play, due to those of us who had lifetime subscriptions feeling betrayed and I still do.
So I come back to eq2 things were great until DOV, I got to say that is when things really started going bad. It was inevitable that free to play was headed to eq2. Eq2 has been bleeding subs for years for various reasons.
To me games that have been sub games that go the route of free to play is just a way to keep the wolf from the door. It created a new type of player the give it to me now crowd, and those who were like me who actually worked for what we got look at free to play with a shade of disgust.
I also look at free to play as a way to drain my wallet. I pay a sub to get the entire package, but when you do the free to play thing you end up spending more than you would with a sub.
I guess times are a changing with the new generation. Let them have their free to play games I just prefer to do things the old way.
Kwill wrote
The recent issue of Game Informer (which I quoted in a later discussion here as well) has an interview with Scott Hartsman, where he says Rift currently has no plans to go to FTP.
Yes that is very true but Rift has taken a totally different path then EQ2 in catering for the casual players, as I wrote earlier Chronicles and Instant adventures are targeted to the casual player add doable dungeons and an at least functioning LFD tool to the offer and you see where the 2 games differ, leveling to 50 in Rift is very boring and the game lacks lots of things that EQ2 offer, but it retains players due to a game that attracts people to pay.
I also (think) I see some things copied from Rift in the upcoming GU so we will see.
The irony is, EQ2’s current Free-to-Play model which mostly lacks power items is basically a level 1-50 free trial. Around that point you have to start buying things.
When I brought up to Georgeson at Fan Faire that a 1-50 free trial would be the best way to go, he said management would never go for giving that much content away. They have to put in the cash shop with power items.
The irony is, if EQ2 F2P had been introduced as a level 1-50 free trial with limited races and classes, it would have gone down a lot smoother.
Hi from your namesake in Australia