Lego Universe Cordons Off Free-to-Play Zone

[Tom Goldman]

Lego Universe Cordons Off Free-to-Play Zone

The cutest MMO in town is going free-to-play, sort of.

NetDevil's Lego Universe [http://www.amazon.com/Lego-Universe-Pc/dp/B002I0HL2A] is a surprisingly fun title for a licensed game, taking the essence of Lego and merging it with many aspects of your typical MMO. You can even build your own Lego castle (or whatever else you want) with pieces you collect as you play. For those interested, but unwilling to pay to give the game a shot, NetDevil has announced a new free-to-play option.

Starting in August, NetDevil will make Lego Universe available via free digital download, so you won't even have to buy the box anymore. Players will then be able to access designated free-to-play areas for an unlimited amount of time. Unlike many of the other titles that have gone free-to-play, Lego Universe won't have its own microtransaction store. The goal is to allow players to try the game and hopefully convert them into $10 monthly subscribers.

The free-to-play areas will consist of two adventure zones and one player property world. The adventure zones are where players complete quests and finish achievements, each with their own storyline. The player property world is a personal zone that allows players to build their own virtual Lego creations. Paying members will get access to 15+ adventure zones, 5+ property worlds, and all upcoming expansions based on new Lego properties.

I like the model and think that other MMOs should follow suit. It's hard to dive in to a new MMO without actually having played it first, so a small free-to-play area is a perfect way to give players an idea of whether or not they like a game. It'd even work for me if it made you go out and buy the box afterward. Hardcore World of Warcraft [http://www.amazon.com/World-Warcraft-Battle-Chest-Mac/dp/B000H96C9M/ref=sr_1_2?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1308671893&sr=1-2] players might not pick up a title like Lego Universe based on name, but could find that they enjoy themselves after they get one of those little Lego space helmets on their avatar.

Permalink

 

[Ringwraith]

Free-to-play areas of full subscription MMOs are such a good idea, it's a wonder they haven't been more widely adopted than they currently are. As the only one I know of which does is Dofus, which gives a pretty respectable area to mess around in for free so you can decide if you'd enjoy the game enough to fork out for their (comparatively cheap) subscription.
I suppose never having a retail box ever being required probably helped with that.

 

[Lazy Kitty]

So basically it's like RuneScape?

 

[fix-the-spade]

$120 a year.

One hundred and twenty dollars per year?!

Nope, cross it off the list right now. I'm at a loss as to how people can spend that much on MMO's and other subscription based games. More than a hundred bucks to never actually have a game, marvellous.

 

[SpcyhknBC]

The real question is, why should I get Lego Universe when I already have Minecraft?

 

[Nargleblarg]

The real question is, why should I get Lego Universe when I already have Minecraft?

And that young one is what we all asked when lego universe launched.

 

[NezumiiroKitsune]

$120 a year.

One hundred and twenty dollars per year?!

Nope, cross it off the list right now. I'm at a loss as to how people can spend that much on MMO's and other subscription based games. More than a hundred bucks to never actually have a game, marvellous.

You'll never a need a years subscription. You can exhaust most of the game of fun in under a month. So think of it as $10 for a game you'll only ever want to play once, unless for some utterly inexplicable reason you either find it too hard to completely drain of content in a month or you really love just building things in Lego.

 

[UnravThreads]

$120 a year.

One hundred and twenty dollars per year?!

Nope, cross it off the list right now. I'm at a loss as to how people can spend that much on MMO's and other subscription based games. More than a hundred bucks to never actually have a game, marvellous.

And? How much do people spend on other equally "pointless" things?

 

[Palindromemordnilap_v1legacy]

Ooh, free? I'd give it a go for free

 

[Chubbs99]

Being in the beta for this game, it was fun. But based on the content available up until the game was released, $10 isn't worth it. Yes i realize they could have added lots more by now as well. It is an interesting idea non the less.

 

[Shadow-Phoenix]

The real question is, why should I get Lego Universe when I already have Minecraft?

Best thing about Minecraft is i bought it in time so i don't pay for updates and i can join other player run servers for free! =D.

 

[weirdee]

$120 a year.

One hundred and twenty dollars per year?!

Nope, cross it off the list right now. I'm at a loss as to how people can spend that much on MMO's and other subscription based games. More than a hundred bucks to never actually have a game, marvellous.

I'd think about it in terms of this:

Have two 60 dollar games ever kept your interest for an entire year?

Well?

Did you end up just kind of selling them back to Gamestop for stupidly low value after a while?

 

[fix-the-spade]

Well?

That's a poor question as it assumes the answer to be yes.

In fact the answer is no, I've never spent $60* on a game, ever, nor have I ever traded in to Gamestop or similar retailer.

In the (approximate) order I bought them, these games have been on my play list for at least a year at some point in my life, any bolded game more than three with regular (at least once a month) play.

Lylat Wars-Still play now, it's an unhealthy obsession
Goldeneye
Perfect Dark
Metal Gear Solid
Gran Turismo 2
Unreal Tournament
Half Life (and multiplayer modes)
Counter Strike-still playing it now
Timesplitters 2
Gran Turismo 4
Halo: Combat Evolved
Battlefield 2: Modern Combat
Warhammer 40'000 Dawn of War
Counter Srike: Source
Battlefield 2
Team Fortress 2

I've never traded a game to Gamestop and I hardly ever pay full price for a game (last game I paid more than £10 for was Left 4 Dead 2, I try and buy new always). Speaking of which I paid £8 for Mass Effect 2 three months after it's rlease, new, sealed.

I find the idea of disposable games at full price stupid (or at least short sighted), I wouldn't pay £40-50 on a game if I wasn't sure it would give me long term value, I'd never be so thick. I find the idea of paying $10 a month to be allowed to play a game even stupider, what game could possibly be as good as the ten to twelve full games I would source with that money and a little patience? Is there really that much content in MMO's?

*Technically I've never spent any dollars on a game, but you get the drift

 

[weirdee]

Your use of "new" is somewhat relative. I guess it would be stupid to pay that much for games if you are okay with staying behind the curve at about the distance of several years or so, supplementing it with downloadable indie titles.

You wouldn't be able to trade any of your games to Gamestop ANYWAY.

Of course, if everybody played like that, developers would only see income years after their work was published.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Your use of "new" is somewhat relative. I guess it would be stupid to pay that much for games if you are okay with staying behind the curve at about the distance of several years or so, supplementing it with downloadable indie titles.

Okay you're moving the goal posts now, reading more into my answer than the information gives.

All those games were bought within a few months or weeks of release, when they were still relevant or 'in the curve' or whatever you want to define it as. I've been playing and buying games for more than two decades, there have been plenty of games in that time that didn't hold my attention for long. Non of the games released in the last 12 to 18 months could be in that list because they haven't been out that long, but in the last year I've bought Mass Effect 2, BC2, Crysis 2, New Vegas, Red Dead Redemption, Dead Space 1 and 2, Portal 2 plus others.

Your question was have any games held my attention for more than a year, the answer is yes, the ones on that list, which I bought new, for less than full price.

In the case of a few (Lylat Wars and Counter Strike) they've held my attention and enjoyment for more than a decade, which isn't bad for a few quid each and further confounds me as to how people spend so much on MMO's and release days blockbusters.

My money gets a lot more content per year than any MMo player manages.

 

[weirdee]

Well yeah. The blockbusters have been getting lower value per dollar for a while. Main thing I see with the lego game is the server costs. Minecraft doesn't require regular payments because the users host their own servers out of pocket.

As great as Goldeneye was though, a whole year? I can only see those games lasting about six months at the most, followed by a replay every now and then that would only be about a week long or so.

Ten to twelve games with 120 bucks? If you're counting indie games and whatever goes on sale at steam (which, by the way, still doesn't count as new at that point), then sure, I guess. I can't really name many cheap indie games that last for more than a week that aren't RTS or overly contrived RPGs though. Y'know, the ones that are basically number crunchers with a few graphics stuck onto them so that your eyes don't bore their way out of the back of your skull.

How many games have you bought that didn't hold up to the value that you paid for them?