Pondering F2P and P2P stuffFollow

I've been trying to think of a F2P model that I could stomach, and I think I've more or less found one. The Eve online discussion is what prompted this, as well as my own experience with the pioneer virtual worlds of Dreamscape back on Compuserve.

Instead of being based on purchasing items, the "pay" part of the F2P would be an acquisition of extra time.

The problem with F2P models is that they rely on a small number of users ("whales" as they are known to the F2P industry) to support the needs of the larger, non-paying population. Because the game is "free" the non paying populace tends to be large, upwards of 90% of the population, meaning that the 10% of whales has to support the other 90% in terms of revenue. F2P games also tend to have a larger, younger user base than subscription based games.

Back in Dreamscape, when it first came about, we were paying the outrageous blood rate of $2/hour. When EQ came out with its ten dollar a month flat fee, the cash cow of Dreamscape fell apart and they had also offer a monthly flat rate to survive. I paid $20 a month for about a year before I became an Acolyte and got a free account, far better than the $300 I racked up on a credit card as a teenager (which caused me to get into a lot of trouble with my parents. I think they disputed the charges since I wasn't 18 yet.)

What if a F2P model gave free complete game access with time limitations? A free account would get you 10 hours of game play a month. You could pay an extra $1 for two more hours of gameplay, up to a maximum of $15 a month, at which point you reached unlimited access since you'd "met" the monthly fee. These micro transactions could occur in real time or ahead of time.

I think such a system could provide both the benefits of the current F2P and P2P models. The overwhelming majority of players, the freebies, are severely limited in server time, meaning they aren't hogging server resources or generally polluting the community. Casual players who just want to log in and mess around on weekends could choose the amount of time they want to invest. For someone who just logs in on Sunday evenings, the free account plus $5 more of game time would suffice for the month. The hard cores can pay up front for unlimited access, and get to camp out overnight selling stuff, or spend 40 hours a week playing, whatever.

Pros:
- Users pay depending on their utilization of server resources
- Users choose how much they want to invest
- Free model opens up basic gameplay to everyone, even kids under 18 without credit cards
- Maximum monthly charge ensures no one gets into a gambling habit and drops $1000 on pay to win stuff

Cons:
- Limited gametime on free model will turn off large population (this may not be a con depending on your age)
- Complex microtransaciton system based on time may be confusing
- The hardcorers will invariably be better dressed and have more achievements than the freebies (since they can spend more time in the game)

Anyway, if 2-3 years down the road Square Enix were to move to a free to play system, this is the kind I would vastly prefer.

That could cater to the more casual/semi-hardcore crowd such as myself. For the most part, my playtime of MMO's consists of a couple hours a week with random spurts of an 8 hour marathon. Every now and then, the wife takes off with the kid and I can play for awhile, which is where I wouldn't mind paying that 1-2$/hour fee or whatever. So in the end, I probably play for free 80% of the time and don't mind dropping that extra 10-15$ of my time allows it.

To avoid problems, I suppose the company could cap your bought time to the monthly fee in case people are retarded (which will happen, often.) I'd probably still be playing XI if that was the case, I've had my account cancelled for the majority of the last year cause I simply don't log in enough. So rather then getting nothing from me, they'd at least be getting 2-3$ here and there.

I never thought there would ever be a free to "play" method that I could abide.

You just blew my mind.


Edited, Mar 23rd 2013 6:15pm by KaneKitty

You got me there i agree!!

I guess i am still thinking as a subscriber thats why haha.

I actually really dislike this idea. I think it's actually a step backwards from subscriptions, even.

I think the model of F2P with paid cosmetics, pets, etc. is fine. Give paying customers more fun options. It just needs to be done right. The model needs to be balanced out so that P2P users don't have an advantage over free users. I also disapprove of F2P models which encourage online gambling. I will never touch a game with in-game lotteries, gachapons, etc.

There are games that do use the system you're suggesting, by the way. They usually use a system similar to fatigue or stamina, but it's basically the same concept. Free users would be allotted a certain amount of content before they run out and can't play anymore; paying users will pay for as much time as they want.

Everyone needs to be on equal ground. If the game is P2P with a flat subcsription fee, everyone is on equal ground. If a game is F2P with paid cosmetics and features like paid weddings (I think Final Fantasy XI eventually got rid of these), world transfers, vanity pets, etc. everyone is still on common ground.

The system you're suggesting gives some members more freedom than others, so it will turn people off immediately.

This is pretty much how most facebook games work, although packaged much less sneakily. In FB games you are limited by energy which allows you to play for a certain amount of time before you run out. to get more energy or to make things go faster for the same energy you have to pay real money. My ex used to play Cafeworld religiously, racking up nearly 700 days of continuous logins. She eventually started purchasing 30, 60, 100 dollars worth of spices and whatnot every month or so, thus making the model way more expensive than a sub fee. What's worse is that this game was so terrible it got to the point where they continued to add more and more stuff to the point where there was no way to complete everything without spending money on it.

I guess the point I'm getting at is that a pay as you go system like that probably wouldn't be nearly so cut and dry, and the whales would most likely have to fork over a lot more cash than that to sustain it.. but then again Zynga is the gaming antichrist so maybe I'm wrong.

I support the well designed fun game you pay to play honestly. Given you were likely sarcastic, LoL you do have to pay for more than just 'dress ups' if you don't want to spend an eternity grinding out 'for free'.

If SE goes the unfortunate route of F2P when they're done with ARR, as long as it's not like Doofus/Wakfu where you can't do much of anything unless you're paying a sub, it'd work out with a small playerbase since they did keep XIV around when under 20k people were supporting it by shutdown.

Someone suggested the same thing in another forum I recently started visiting (yes, I'm seeing other forums). It was met there with not much positivity for a melange of reasons.

It sounds perfectly sensible to me, but a sensible solution isn't always a working one, either. You'd need to address the question of actual human behaviors with regards to subscribing. The model sounds enticing, but that doesn't mean that players will actually take to it.

With the first month free and the right marketing, I could see it being workable. But you're also creating a payment mechanism which requires players to keep track of their playtime in order to know how much they're paying, which could intrude upon the gameplay in unforeseen ways. One of the things that makes MMOs so successful is that they allow players to lose themselves in the game.

I'd probably drop the in-game warnings and just have it in the agreement that if they go over, they pay for the next level automatically. Or just make an easy way to turn off the warnings, I suppose.

I greatly prefer the P2P model as well. I'm fine with knowing I'm going to spend $15 a month no matter what. The weeks where I play a few hours will balance out with the days I play for hours on end. I also like knowing that someone can't just buy up a win. I do like a vanity shop though. I dropped $10 on the spider mount in Rift. Why not? Pro-rating time in a F2P model is, I think, also a very good idea. More options is always better.

Maybe Cat should send SE her resume'. lol

Edited, Mar 24th 2013 2:09pm by LebargeX

I was thinking of a free month to counter that, but it works without requiring a subscription either way. You just cut them off unless they've subscribed.

Surprisingly Facebook has never caught on and banned them. I got all creative when I set them up. They have legit sounding names (Alfred Farmer, Betty Farmer, Charlie Gardener, Daphne Gardener) and I set them up with marriages, different birthdays, anniversaries, and cross friendships. They even made status updates at first, talking about their daily lives. Francine Mower owned a restaurant. Penny Lakes was a lawyer. Juliet Bush was a retiree. George Grass was a teacher.

Each has a unique Facebook icon created using the eLouai Candbyar doll maker.