City of Heroes: Live Forum Archive

Making CoX F2P: How would you do it?

Adeon Hawkwood

By Adeon Hawkwood,
Posted on: 2011-05-19 21:53 in CoH and CoV General Discussions

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
Truth prevents you from being able to name another MMO as a direct answer ("Divest yourself of..." and "financial loss" are not words that equal "Success.")
No, seriously, as posted by Freitag here, I can't name other MMO's.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooGirl View Post
No, seriously, as posted by Freitag here, I can't name other MMO's.
Doesn't invalidate my point. If there IS no other MMO that can be named as a truthful answer to the question, forum rules don't matter. If forum rules prevent me from saying "Flugelhorn," and someone asks what my favourite type of fish is, "Flugelhorn" would not be a valid answer to begin with and the forum rules would have nothing to do with my lack of saying "Flugelhorn" as an answer.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooGirl View Post
Forum rules prevent me from mentioning the names of any other MMO.
Sorry but saying NONE is not against the forum rules. I was very careful in my phrasing of the question.

The key word was "Successful" . And as we know just the opposite has been announced, all super hero MMO's in the industry that tried to go the F2P route have lost millions.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
Sorry but saying NONE is not against the forum rules. I was very careful in my phrasing of the question.

The key word was "Successful" . And as we know just the opposite has been announced, all super hero MMO's in the industry that tried to go the F2P route have lost millions.
But they were failures at launch before they switched to F2P, weren't they?

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyV View Post
Another thing that strikes me is that people keep posting completely unproductive messages like, "I don't like it," or "If it goes F2P, I'm quitting!" You know what? If Paragon Studios/NCsoft thinks that they'll make more money and have a larger loyal player base without you, they're not going to shed too many tears about it.
Money talks, and my $15/month speaks louder to Paragon Studios/NCsoft right now than a purely hypothetical F2P community of any size. In tough economic times, I sympathize with those having to tighten their belts, having been there before, but my own experience with F2P in some games and observations of conversion to it in others do not suggest it would be worth the attendant headaches to convert the playerbase in hopes of attracting new or returning players.

I would, however, support more "welcome back" offers for free periods, extended even to trial accounts and held for longer periods. (I receive these kinds of offers from other games I quit for CoH on a regular basis.) I'm baffled that there hasn't been anything for CoH's anniversary or the "stress test" on Freedom.

Quote:
Instead, how about trying to be constructive? If you don't like it, why do you not like it? Even better yet, how could Paragon Studios/NCsoft address your concerns to make you more comfortable and happy?
Adapting the "Time Code" subscription model of exchanging in-game currencies for playing time could be feasible if (a) players didn't mind yet another type or (b) the devs fix the regular Inf. market (good luck with either). Or Paragon Studios/NCSoft could consider either cheaper subscriptions for either shorter durations or pay-per-hour models.

The fact is, Paragon Studios/NCSoft have a model that they appear to be satisfied with. Persuading them to change to another one - which has at best a very mixed record - would be difficult under ordinary circumstances and will be harder still in tough economic times like these.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
See also server-merge-copypasta.
Someone is going to have to put together a similar one for F2P threads since they always devolve to the same arguments.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooGirl View Post
But they were failures at launch before they switched to F2P, weren't they?
I would argue no. It was the stunts they pulled after launch that killed them but that isn't for discussion here.

 

Posted

Should convert to F2P. Don't convert to F2P. F2P could destroy CoH. F2P could help CoH. Whatever, it is all irrelevant and speculation at this point. The only reality of the situation involves the day when CoH is forced to choose between trying a new business model (possibly F2P) or shut down the servers. It is inevitable because nothing lasts forever. When will the day come? Could be next year, could be 2015, no one knows except for the folks at NCSoft/PS.

It's fine to have ideology. It's fine to show loyalty to the current business model. Not at the expense of reality and logic however. The absolutely, undeniable, irrefutable fact is that, when a company is at the threshold of having to make critical, survival based decisions, the wishes of existing customers is of secondary concern. This is especially true when the decision could potentially bring to the table opportunities to attract new customers and thus, revenue. It's the core fundamental behind how most for profit company operates. It's just the ruthless aspect of capitalism at work.

Don't believe me? Just think about every merger & acquisition you may have been a part of as an employee or customer. How often do old timer employees get shafted by the new compensation/benefit structure? How often do old customers have the terms of their services changed unfavorably? Dare I say just about every time? Yet, as long as the company brings in new customers or increase revenue, they'll just chalk those up as casaulties of the transition. It stinks for sure but it's still the truth. This is why I don't care either way or refuse to get worked up about it. It's completely out of my control and the sooner other people realize this, the better. This is one rare instance where *our* opinion really does not matter, not in the least bit. I could collect 1000 signatures for a for/against F2P petition and hand deliver it to PS headquarters 20 miles down the road and it would not make a lick of difference. Sorry to say but that *is* the cold hard reality.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Forbin_Project View Post
Sorry but saying NONE is not against the forum rules. I was very careful in my phrasing of the question.
You're correct that you phrased the question such that you would get the only answer that you wanted to hear, yes.

There's nothing special about the superhero genre in comparison to other genres. Suggesting that you can't apply the lessons or data points of other games because they are fantasy or space opera or golden age of piracy or cake baking is putting way too much emphasis on the genre at the expense of the one thing all of those activities have in common - that that they are multiplayer games. (Well, maybe not the cake baking, though it might be interesting to see just how you could gamify that as a MMO.)

 

Posted

BTW - as someone who has actively played some of those "subscription converted to freemium" MMORPG games, I find most of the hyperbole about "lol, newb" and "Beware the gold farmers!" and whatever that boils down to "anybody who doesn't pay a sub is an undesirable low-quality community member" to be inaccurate when it isn't outright offensive.

My personal experience is that nearly all such FUD-based generalizations turn out to be untrue in practice. I'll grant you that I have not played every freemium MMORPG out there, but I've played some of of the name brands and I have not yet experienced any such behavior on a grand scale in any of those brand-name MMORPG freemium games. Since you can find such behavior on a small scale even amongst the current subscribers of THIS game, I am unconvinced that the low level of such behavior in the freemium games is somehow a symptom of something fundamentally wrong with the freemium revenue model.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickRiptide View Post
You're correct that you phrased the question such that you would get the only answer that you wanted to hear, yes.

There's nothing special about the superhero genre in comparison to other genres. Suggesting that you can't apply the lessons or data points of other games because they are fantasy or space opera or golden age of piracy or cake baking is putting way too much emphasis on the genre at the expense of the one thing all of those activities have in common - that that they are multiplayer games. (Well, maybe not the cake baking, though it might be interesting to see just how you could gamify that as a MMO.)
Honestly it was done in response to other posts by several people that used "fantasy" MMO's in their generalizations. Just a little fun with wordplay.

 

Posted

I wouldn't too risky. Let someone else do it and get it right then look at and look at it again.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooGirl View Post
I can't - because no other game is like COH.
Exactly. You're starting with a sample size of one (1). A game that, admittedly doesn't have the same longevity, genre, or game structure that CoH does. And you're trying to apply your assumptions about it to CoH.

Simply because it has been characterized as a "success" for F2P.


Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chad Gulzow-Man View Post
If it's a different game, then I honestly have no idea which one you're talking about, and am thus surprised that they saw a huge influx of players.
It's the one that's based on a 40 years old pen & paper table top RPG system. It was highly hyped back in 2005 before its launch in 2006. Another hint would be, it uses 4th edition rules of the said PnP system (or was it 3.5? forgot).

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
And you're trying to apply your assumptions about it to CoH.
The same could be said when assuming all of the negatives that have happened with other F2P MMO's would happen with COH if COH went F2P.

Quote:
Unless you've restricted said F2P accounts in exactly the same way you have Trial accounts, you open the door to griefers and goldspammers.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Residentx10 View Post
I wouldn't too risky. Let someone else do it and get it right then look at and look at it again.
Another company already did it right and the proof is that the freemium game is draining customers away from its sister subscription game. Those "Live" subscription players who swore that freemium would destroy their game and they wanted nothing to do with it are being drawn over by the prospect of the huge influx of new players to adventure with. A fact that also addresses the concern of the poster upstream who asked for proof that making a freemium version of a subscription MMO would actually draw in an influx of new players.

What they did wrong, actually, was that when the experiment began their goal was NOT to really create a freemium game so much as to create a freemium gateway that would funnel the freemium players into subscriptions.

They learned the hard way that the majority of the freemium players were resistant to subscriptions to the point that they would rather quit the game when they hit the edges of the freemium tier than subscribe and get blanket access to everything.

This is a factor in freemium game customers that I have frequently observed, yet seen little discussion about from the standpoint of design. Many (I feel I should say "most" but have no statistical basis for saying it) are motivated to stay freemium because they enjoy the sense of control and planning afforded by the ala carte purchasing system. There is a sense of both freedom and investment in buying exactly what it is that you want or feel you need; no more and no less.

This is one reason that a faction of the freemium players are willing to spend MORE on ala carte purchases than they might on the equivalent subscription access. There is a sense of ownership and a sense of empowerment that comes from buying the parts of the game that you want and having permanent access to them as opposed to buying blanket access to the whole game, including parts you don't care about, and then losing your access entirely if you decide to terminate payments.

It's an entirely different market of customers whose motivations only moderately overlap the motivations of the dedicated subscription customer. Any discussion of freemium that doesn't address that reality is a waste of breath and time, in my opinion.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlickRiptide View Post
Another company already did it right and the proof is that the freemium game is draining customers away from its sister subscription game. Those "Live" subscription players who swore that freemium would destroy their game and they wanted nothing to do with it are being drawn over by the prospect of the huge influx of new players to adventure with. A fact that also addresses the concern of the poster upstream who asked for proof that making a freemium version of a subscription MMO would actually draw in an influx of new players.

What they did wrong, actually, was that when the experiment began their goal was NOT to really create a freemium game so much as to create a freemium gateway that would funnel the freemium players into subscriptions.

They learned the hard way that the majority of the freemium players were resistant to subscriptions to the point that they would rather quit the game when they hit the edges of the freemium tier than subscribe and get blanket access to everything.

This is a factor in freemium game customers that I have frequently observed, yet seen little discussion about from the standpoint of design. Many (I feel I should say "most" but have no statistical basis for saying it) are motivated to stay freemium because they enjoy the sense of control and planning afforded by the ala carte purchasing system. There is a sense of both freedom and investment in buying exactly what it is that you want or feel you need; no more and no less.

This is one reason that a faction of the freemium players are willing to spend MORE on ala carte purchases than they might on the equivalent subscription access. There is a sense of ownership and a sense of empowerment that comes from buying the parts of the game that you want and having permanent access to them as opposed to buying blanket access to the whole game, including parts you don't care about, and then losing your access entirely if you decide to terminate payments.

It's an entirely different market of customers whose motivations only moderately overlap the motivations of the dedicated subscription customer. Any discussion of freemium that doesn't address that reality is a waste of breath and time, in my opinion.
I agree their different but "Freemium" is unattractive to BUSINESS..which exists to make PROFIT. Freemium must change it's name. In another company's case...let's not talk about that

There is a group that love to go from game to game to game to game looking for content. I would like to do that personally... pay zero and play everything. Casual gamers we call them but companies need commitments. F2P now is the buzzword for my game can't stand on it's own....that's their rep now but it could change. Don't make me talk about Champions.

Either way, CoH shouldn't go F2P. NEVER, NEVER, NEVER.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hyperstrike View Post
A game that, admittedly doesn't have the same longevity, genre, or game structure that CoH does.[/B].
Have you played it? CoH only beat it by 2 years so not a huge difference in longevity. There are also a lot of shared similarities. The vast majority of content in both games are instanced, repeatable, and that includes the end game content. They are both easy to level in and are alt friendly. Loot generation for each individual player are determined by the RNG for the most part. They both have relatively short travel time. Both games have a end game raid system that involves at the most 2-3 groups as opposed to 100 character zerg rushes. They both have themes that appeal to a certain old and established segment of the general gaming population.

Now there are also some differences between the two. That game has a gated end game system as in to gain access to a raid, you have to do the sometimes irritating pre-req quests first. It also has item decay which can get very frustrating when it comes to certain creatures. Being a fantasy MMO where the armor you wear dictates how you look, it also lacks the cosmetic touches/variety of CoH. Those differences in features is why I left that game.

 

Posted

To answer the OP: I honestly don't know. I'm not all that experienced with MMOs in general. CoH is the only MMO I currently subscribe to, but I still skirt in and out of a few other F2P MMOs when I can. There's a particular elementary magic school I quite enjoy, and I'd have never visited if I had to subscribe first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by baron_inferno View Post
...The only reality of the situation involves the day when CoH is forced to choose between trying a new business model (possibly F2P) or shut down the servers. It is inevitable because nothing lasts forever. When will the day come? Could be next year, could be 2015, no one knows except for the folks at NCSoft/PS.
This, to me, is why it's worth discussing this. I don't see F2P as an option for growing this game, even if that's a possible outcome. I would see it more as an option for extending the game's life once the subscriptions fall below the point its financially able to maintain through subscription alone.

I want my characters to exist as long as possible, and if, at some point, going F2P extends this games life even 6 months or a year, then I'm all for it.

d

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Residentx10 View Post
I agree their different but "Freemium" is unattractive to BUSINESS..which exists to make PROFIT. Freemium must change it's name. In Another Company's case...let's not talk about that
I'm not really sure how to respond to a statement like this. The fact that you're making it tells me that you haven't been paying attention to what's happening in the game industry as a whole over the last couple of years.

I'll simply say this - Freemium is being widely adopted because it IS profitable. Like every other monetization strategy, it is appropriate for some properties and less appropriate for others. The implementation is key and I have observed that poor implementations can have as detrimental an effect as poor content.

The one thing you can say about that other company is that they are in a unique position in the industry. They are an umbrella game publisher and they have been such for years. There were a lot of us that hoped that NCSoft might develop their own umbrella rather than completely close down underperforers like Auto Assault and Tabula Rasa. I digress.

The umbrella gives them a unique opportunity. In my opinion, they are attempting to move away from being "The MMO publisher" towards being "The Station Cash economy". You buy their currency and use it with ALL of their games, and it doesn't really matter which game motivated you to buy it or which game you spend it on. As soon as you buy the virtual currency, they have their revenue. If you don't "spend" any SC at all, they still have your money as revenue. Offering you multiple games to "spend" it on just means that you have that many possible money sinks to drain it away and encourage you to buy more.

Freemium for them is just another avenue for encouraging customers to purchase their funny money. They are Disney World selling Disney Dollars and their games are the various theme parks under the Disney World umbrella where you can go and spend your funny money on amusements; just as long as you don't ask to have it converted back into real dollars. (Homer Simpson learned about that the hard way at Crusty Land.)

Other game publishers don't have the luxury to be an umbrella company, so in that sense you can call them a special case. In general, though, they are really feeling their way through this transition to freemium just like everyone else.

 

Posted

First the other super hero MMO that converted to F2P doesn't count as the game sucked anyway. Going F2P wouldn't help it.

The other games (won't mention names, but initials are DDO & LOTRO) are doing better and making more money after going F2P.

Look at it this way. If CoH went F2P based on the DDO model, not much would change for those already subscribed. They would just play as normal. However it would make the game a lot more accessible to those who wouldn't otherwise try the game because they didn't want to pay $15/month. Plus the new players would need to pay to get access to higher level zones, extra character slots, maybe extra costume slots, etc, plus booster packs. Those who already are subscribed would be getting NCSoft points, Hero coin, or whatever the currency is per month for being VIP members.

I'm thinking the only difference would be a greater influx of players that would mean more cash for the developers.

This of course would not be what is now a trial account. It would be a normal account with zone/content restrictions like how the games from Turbine are run.

I also play the game based on Tolkien's trilogy and have a lifetime membership. When they went F2P nothing really changed except that I got access to some cool things I didn't have before like being able to buy horse riding skill early. I also get 500 turbine points a month just for being a VIP member.

Now assuming it's based on the Turbine model I could see going F2P being great for CoH. More people willing to try out the game without the burden of paying $15/month, while those already subscribed would still be playing normally.

Uber Talgrim - level 50 emp/dark defender
Uber Rod - level 50 dark melee/regen scrapper
Rod Valdr - level 50 invuln/SS tanker
Talgrim - level 50 ninja/dark mastermind

OMG!! Please add these costume designs now!

 

Posted

From the OP I gathered this thread is supposed to as pointless as a "Raphael vs Wolverine" thread and should be considered as such. Any argument about the implausibility / impossibility of ever having a ninja turtle fight a mutant in one comic it out of its scope.

And I treated it as such.

If a Dev would have come and said "hey guys we're thinking of going F2P, what do you guys think about it?", I would have been with you all holding pitchforks and nerdraging.


 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tormentoso View Post
From the OP I gathered this thread is supposed to as pointless as a "Raphael vs Wolverine" thread and should be considered as such. Any argument about the implausibility / impossibility of ever having a ninja turtle fight a mutant in one comic it out of its scope.

And I treated it as such.

If a Dev would have come and said "hey guys we're thinking of going F2P, I would have been with you all holding pitchforks and nerdraging.
I think it's a relevant discussion to have considering the nature of the MMO business. We have a competitor coming out in the future from another large comic book house that will be launching their Superhero MMO free to play.

"Free to play/microtransaction" isn't going away and there are indications it could be the business model of future MMO's/Online Games.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by UberRod View Post
Look at it this way. If CoH went F2P based on the DDO model, not much would change for those already subscribed. They would just play as normal. However it would make the game a lot more accessible to those who wouldn't otherwise try the game because they didn't want to pay $15/month. Plus the new players would need to pay to get access to higher level zones, extra character slots, maybe extra costume slots, etc, plus booster packs. Those who already are subscribed would be getting NCSoft points, Hero coin, or whatever the currency is per month for being VIP members.
Since people keep mentioning "oh, access to higher level zones could be sold" and the like - let ME point out that we've been steadily REMOVING those restrictions from the game as is, especially when SSK was introduced.

Hazard zones? Used to have a level to enter, now - no.
COV? Used to be a separate "game," now - no.

Suddenly reintroducing "Oh, your (subbed) friends can SK each other and team that level 8 with the level 32 and the level 15 to go beat on some Rikti with the level 45... but guess what, you can't, pay up!" wouldn't go over so well with *either* side (free or subbed,) I'd think.

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by VoodooGirl View Post
I think it's a relevant discussion to have considering the nature of the MMO business. We have a competitor coming out in the future from another large comic book house that will be launching their Superhero MMO free to play.
The same marvelous one that's been cancelled a few times?

 

Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis_Bill View Post
The same marvelous one that's been cancelled a few times?
Well played sir. Well played.


Clicking on the linked image above will take you off the City of Heroes site. However, the guides will be linked back here.