Free 2 Play still being considered?

[Griss]

I have a serious problem with F2P games because of the terrible communities they tend to generate. Just look at League of Legends...

I would more look at the type of game that breads the vitriol fueled cesspools that play moba style games more then the payment model. If lol, hon or what ever had a pay up front model.. the respective communitys would still be as hostile. Its the nature of the beast.


Though speaking on the thing that constantly pops up around this topic Pay to win. I see this phrase tossed around a lot, and i think people put way to much stock into it and more importantly rush to say it far to quickly. The real problem with the model is game companys that sell out and out power. Now by that I am speaking specifically on equipment that is superior to any thing obtainable by just playing the game and the only way to obtain said shiny is to go through the cash shop. And even then that only becomes some what of an issue when it comes to player vs player combat and only in extreme cases.

But to be honest I think this is yet another Everest being made out of a ant hill by the forums regulars. Of course there keeping the option in mind It does not mean there going to go for it. They are keeping there options open and while free to play is hard to pull off correctly its possible to do.

They would have to find a method that makes the most sense for this game and make sure that people feel like there getting a fair shake should they choose to pay or not. Pure cash mart, or a la carte with a monthly option or every body has access to every thing with other incentives to put down some dough. Its a damned hard road to ho and one that has the potential to blow up so hard that it would be final brick in the tomb.

[Khal_Drogo]

Yes, but it still ends up costing less than f2p. It's the difference between paying 30-40 for an expansion, or paying 100+ [to acquire] every bit of content within that expansion...

In p2p, over the course of a year subscribing, you pay 200 dollars -[assuming] you get an expansion release [that year].

In f2p, to get the same experience, you can pay upwards of 300+ depending on how much they charge for things; and, to top it off, they [tempt you to pay] even more through things that [reward] you [with] in game bonuses.


Looking at promathia as an example, 1 year of play in it:

200 bucks for the xpac + expansion

...or if it was a f2p deal, youd have paid probly 10 per area for the first 3 dungeons(the promathias)
then you'd have paid 10 dollars per zone you unlocked as the story progressed, which [would add] up to ALOT.

Sea itself woulda probly cost 20-30 bucks...

...fyi: i have played several f2p games and seen what happens, its not pretty

I understand where you're coming from, but you have to consider things from a different perspective...what about the countless others out there, who never set foot in Dynamis, Salvage, Sea, or Nyzul Isle, and so on.

Some people just want access to all the free-roaming areas to explore, exp, and maybe camp some NMs. Why should we have to pay $160 +/- a year to play a game we already paid for; not to mention the drain it has on the life-expectancy of our console/PC.

I, personally, had tons of friends (RL ones too) who never once accessed Salvage, Sea, or Nyzul Isle; and some of them didn't set foot in Dynamis until, about, the last 6 months or so of their 7-year long, intermittent gameplay... Does P2P sound fair for them?

[Natabant]

I agree with everything here. F2P is only 'free' in a loose, general sense. Also, keep in mind that with the F2P model, the development focus shifts from creating quality content that will draw more subs to creating inconvenience and carrots on sticks to convince people to fork over an ever increasing supply of cash.

The quality of LotRO nosedived after they went F2P. I don't want to see the same happen here.

I'm sure SE could find a way to balance it all out. Honestly, with the way things are going now, F2P may be the only option left for them to pay off their development costs.

And, F2P doesn't always have to work the same way. They don't have to make F2P such a tedious process; and quality of gameplay doesn't always have to suffer as a result. They could use special services to compensate for their losses, like:

~Registration Codes: $10
~Server Migration: $15
~Name Change: $35
~Race change: $25
~Extra Character: $5

Another example would be to also increase the prices for expansions. Using XI again as a template:

~Rise of Zilart: $45
~Chains of Promathia: $85
~Treasures of Aht Urhgan: $85
~Wings of the Goddess: $85
~Abbysea: 75 cents lol .........lvl 80+ ruined XI.

They should've taken limits off all merits: imagine having your attributes and skills @999, and recast timers on special abilities reduced to a few seconds...shoulda, coulda, woulda

and so on...I don't know exactly what they could/should charge, but there is no reason to make people pay $100+ a year just to access content for a game they bought.

I understand that a lot of time and money goes into maintaining their equipment and developing content. However, there are a lot of ways to balance out the prices w/o making people pay these ridiculous prices.

[Mireille]

I, personally, had tons of friends (RL ones too) who never once accessed Salvage, Sea, or Nyzul Isle; and some of them didn't set foot in Dynamis until, about, the last 6 months or so of their 7-year long, intermittent gameplay... Does P2P sound fair for them?

Yes. They signed up for a game that had that payment model. The fact that they choose not to try all the content in the game is their choice, and has nothing to do with SE charging them a monthly fee.

Consider also that many of those free roaming areas, job abilities, quests that are in the game today didn't come with the game DVD they were added to the game as a part of version updates financed by subscriber fees.

[Antipika]

I'd probably have to nerdrage a bit if they went F2P. I mean, I purchased 2 collectors editions, and I am currently supporting the development path to v2.0 with my $10/month subscription. If after all that they were to switch to a model where suddenly I either had to fork out a large sum of money for a "premium membership" or pay item by item to unlock things.. yeah.. Wouldn't go over very well with me. SE would lose more than an XIV player.

Why "large sum of money"? A lot of recent F2P models are nothing but a normal Paid to play model + some kind of "light" version of the game that is free.

If you check Aion for example, their new F2P is :

- New members: you get a very limited version of the game (basically like an endless trial, with heavy gameplay limitations)
- Former subscribers: Full game, but cooldowns for instances reset are really high, EXP is not boosted
- Premium subscribers: $9.99 a month, cooldown for instances are "normal", EXP is boosted (like +20%)

And the Cash Shop only have useless items like pets, characters appearance changes and scroll to reset cooldown of instances (but these scrolls have a 6 hours cooldown themselves so not like you can spam instances).

Something like that could definitely work with XIV.

EXP boost? As long as it remains reasonable like Aion, +/- 20% doesn't matter. Instances reset? Well if you are a casual player and not willing to pay for the game, I guess you don't care much about cooldown reset for instances. Pets, character appearance and all? I personally don't care at all. And even companies with a paid to play model usually charge for these services or do things like SE did with the Goobbue (subscribe now if you want your exclusive mount) and I bet we'll have similar things with 2.0 collectors edition & pre-orders.

Rather than using the term "F2P", the above model is called Freemium and that would work with XIV, as long as premium advantages aren't retarded (like +200% EXP, powerful items you can purchase with real money etc.) It's just a matter of balance. Nothing else.

[MicahZerrshia]

I understand where you're coming from, but you have to consider things from a different perspective...what about the countless others out there, who never set foot in Dynamis, Salvage, Sea, or Nyzul Isle, and so on.

Some people just want access to all the free-roaming areas to explore, exp, and maybe camp some NMs. Why should we have to pay $160 +/- a year to play a game we already paid for; not to mention the drain it has on the life-expectancy of our console/PC.

I, personally, had tons of friends (RL ones too) who never once accessed Salvage, Sea, or Nyzul Isle; and some of them didn't set foot in Dynamis until, about, the last 6 months or so of their 7-year long, intermittent gameplay... Does P2P sound fair for them?

Well its their choice not to do something they paid for and frankly they missed out on alot of the fun the game had to offer by choosing not to set foot in those areas. That being said just because a small minority of ppl dont wanna bother with some of what turned into core aspects of the game should not mean those of us who take full advantage of what the game has to offer should have to pay more in the long run.

And really I still cannot believe someone who played xi didnt bother with salvage, sea, nyzul or dyna. What exactly did they do? Those 4 things alone were time consuming morsals of fun.

Overall the game cannot go f2p if they really want to keep it fun and interesting. All the f2p games I have played have been boring and left alot to be desired.

[Antipika]

Overall the game cannot go f2p if they really want to keep it fun and interesting. All the f2p games I have played have been boring and left alot to be desired.

All right, let's say XIV would have remained free for everyone last month. But instead SE would have introduced the following model :

- Free: The current FF XIV you have now
- Premium:

• Anima & Guardian's favour: Refresh twice faster
• Levequest allowance: Every 24 hours instead of 36 hours
• One extra free character
• One extra free retainer per character, retainer inventory upgraded to 200
• Feature to rename your Chocobo and Retainer, once every 90 days
• (+any kind of bonus I didn't think of, but which wouldn't "break" the game)

Would it make XIV less fun and interesting for you because of that?

[Starlord]

All right, let's say XIV would have remained free for everyone last month. But instead SE would have introduced the following model :

- Free: The current FF XIV you have now
- Premium:

• Anima & Guardian's favour: Refresh twice faster
• Levequest allowance: Every 24 hours instead of 36 hours
• One extra free character
• One extra free retainer per character, retainer inventory upgraded to 200
• Feature to rename your Chocobo and Retainer, once every 90 days
• (+any kind of bonus I didn't think of, but which wouldn't "break" the game)

Would it make XIV less fun and interesting for you because of that?

The Temptation is there, and top two is Gameplay Mechanics, So at least to me Yes it would be

[Antipika]

Well temptation needs to be there and off course you still need things that slightly affects game mechanisms or it's not a F2P/Freemium model anymore, but just a normal pay to play model like we have now, where you pay for extra services for retainers, characters etc.

I still find it hard to claim that the game would be less interesting just because subscribers gets a small boost like that. I'd rather see XIV with more players and see people who decided to leave when monthly was introduced to come back into the game with such a model implemented, rather than seeing XIV dying slowly.

Then off course, that would only apply if 2.0 is not a success. If SE delivers, then yeah no need for that

(Also extra retainers/characters does affect the gameplay, yet you didn't mention that. If I can have more retainers it means I can sell more items at the same time. It can be a real economic advantage. You can also store more items which is a gameplay advantage and personally I find that more important than Guardian's favour... Maybe you forgot that point on purpose because SE... is already charging us for that (extra character at least, but it means more retainers too))

[Khal_Drogo]

I'd probably have to nerdrage a bit if they went F2P. I mean, I purchased 2 collectors editions, and I am currently supporting the development path to v2.0 with my $10/month subscription. If after all that they were to switch to a model where suddenly I either had to fork out a large sum of money for a "premium membership" or pay item by item to unlock things.. yeah.. Wouldn't go over very well with me. SE would lose more than an XIV player.

Natabant had a pretty good example of how F2P could work.....

~Registration Codes: $10
~Server Migration: $15
~Name Change: $35
~Race change: $25
~Extra Character:$5

Expansions....

~Rise of Zilart:$45
~Chains of Promathia: $85
~Treasures of Aht Urhgan: $85
~Wings of the Goddess: $85


He put Abbysea @75 cents lol...which, I gotta say, I agree completely. Maxing out all your merits would've accomplished everything the 99 cap did w/o completely undermining sub job restrictions.

Well its their choice not to do something they paid for and frankly they missed out on alot of the fun the game had to offer by choosing not to set foot in those areas. That being said just because a small minority of ppl dont wanna bother with some of what turned into core aspects of the game should not mean those of us who take full advantage of what the game has to offer should have to pay more in the long run.

F2P doesn't have to be modeled any certain way. SE can focus on charging for stuff that doesn't affect gameplay. There's no law out there that states: "F2P must charge for each and every bit of content released, down to the most trivial thing."