Mythic Founder Thinks Most Free-to-Play MMOs Are "Crap"

[Marshall Honorof]

Mythic Founder Thinks Most Free-to-Play MMOs Are "Crap"

One of the minds behind Warhammer Online envisions a future where subscription-based MMOs keep out the riffraff.

MMOs just can't get people to subscribe anymore. From World of Warcraft [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/110549-Microsoft-Details-Age-Of-Empires-Online-Pricing-Scheme], every MMO seems to be embracing a free-to-play model. At least one MMO veteran is unwilling to give up the idea of subscription fees, however. Mark Jacobs, former CEO of Mythic Entertainment, believes that the market will swing back towards subscription fees. These fees, he argues, will allow developers to produce more innovative games with fewer disruptive players.

"[The] problem with free-to-play is that a lot of the time the games are crap," says Jacobs. "I think some players are starting to get tired of it. They're willing to pay a little bit more. Are they willing to pay $5 a month? $10 a month? $20 a month? I don't know yet but I think we will see a shift from free-to-play back to a model where it isn't one size fits all."

Jacobs goes on to say that a free-to-play environment encourages players to engage in griefing behavior without penalty, and that subscription-based games will have to offer more than polished WoW clones. "Innovation is difficult and sometimes innovation doesn't work. But to come into this space now with a very high-priced WOW game would just be tough."

Jacobs believes that the subscription figures for EA's upcoming Star Wars MMO The Old Republic may prove to be either a death knell or a renaissance for subscription-based games. "If EA is right and it's successful then other publishers or developers will look at the space and go 'see, you can make money selling subscriptions,'" he explains. "And if it doesn't do well, that would be an argument for saying that free-to-play really is dominant."

Jacobs may possess the invisible hand [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112212-Free-to-Play-Age-of-Conan-Doubles-Revenues] will decide whether the subscription model is still viable. As Jacobs pointed out, "It will be an interesting few months."

Source: Eurogamer [http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-10-04-why-subs-based-mmos-have-a-future]


Permalink

 

[Aeshi]

Speaking as somebody who's played a great deal of F2P MMOs I'd have to say I agree with him.

Though I still say those "Free-to-Play" MMOs will probably end up costing you more with all the micro-transactions and everything.

 

[Woodsey]

The model really doesn't hold any appeal to me.

Most F2P's seem to simply use a system that's making me think more about what I'm paying as opposed to the game itself. Monthly fees, I can just drop the money at the start of the month and not have to think about it.

"Free-to-play" is also an incredibly misleading name most of the time.

 

[Fasckira]

Though I still say those "Free-to-Play" MMOs will probably end up costing you more with all the micro-transactions and everything.

Thats pretty much the idea. In theory it allows you to pay as much or as little as you want to play a game you enjoy. The problem at the moment though is that a lot of games are turning into Pay-2-Win models where you see some players sinking silly amounts of money in order to become the best.

I think it'd be nice to see a merge of the two - a simple base rate monthly amount with the ability to buy extra things that dont drastically affect gameplay (like visual customisations or similar).

 

[Cowabungaa]

"Free-to-play" is also an incredibly misleading name most of the time.

Good heavens it is. Especially Lord of the Rings Online played that card incredibly well. Kinda low and vile, yes, but at the same time incredibly well. I mean sure it's free to play, but do you want to keep leveling past level 20 without grinding yourself into oblivion? Well, better fork over that cash for the questing packs then!
And it apparently works fantastic to boot. Oh Turbine, how dastardly clever you are.

 

[Mouse_Crouse]

I rather enjoy the Team Fortress 2 approach. Everything can be obtained for free, with enough time investment. Or you can choose to put up the cash for the things you want NOW.

Edit: Having said that, I still prefer the WoW model of a straight up subscription fee.

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

I think there's definitely some truth to what he's saying. Expansive, good MMOs just cost so much to make and to maintain compared to even big-budget games that a subscription model really does offer the best chance at a winning game. Being able to be relatively sure of the game's income for a while means being able to comfortably invest more in the game's future. I think he also makes a very good point about TOR - it really is feeling like the one big chance to prove that this business model can still work. If it fails, I imagine it'll be a while before we see anything like it attempted again.

Gating the community also reminds me a lot of that talk Gabe Newell gave, discussing how he thinks it would be better if people with a bad reputation online had to pay more to play games online or have voice chat, while people who are known to be fun to play with might get free games or discounts. It's a very nice system and I really wish more gamers would recognize what an immense difference cost makes in keeping out griefers. Even a tiny nominal cost goes a long way: very few legitimate players are going to avoid a game because it costs a few bucks, but a lot more griefers are going to avoid it.

On the other hand, I think the F2P models that exist right now are, for the most part, still pretty primitive. I don't think we've figured out the best ways to do it and I definitely think these games will get better and the model will become more viable as people start hitting on better systems. Compare the "buy special overpowered weapons" item shops to that of a game like LoL for instance. We're definitely moving in the right direction and it's only a matter of time before these become more viable, possibly even for funding something like an MMO.

 

[TheDooD]

Speaking as somebody who's played a great deal of F2P MMOs I'd have to say I agree with him.

Though I still say those "Free-to-Play" MMOs will probably end up costing you more with all the micro-transactions and everything.

Yup you most likely have to spend around $200+ to really be a badass in most F2P MMO's. hell most of the money goes into buying storage and the GOOD healing items which is dick move.

 

[Jegsimmons]

ive had good fun on the F2P mmos. so...i disagree. and i never forked over any money what so ever.

 

[Seventh Actuality]

Pretty much this. If I felt a subscription MMO wasn't giving me value for my money, I'd stop paying. The subscription model produces objectively better games and works off competition rather than exploitation.

There's a reason free to play is the business model of choice for failed MMOs - they operate that way because they straight up aren't good enough to compete on the same level as WoW. This is why SWOTR being subscription based makes me very optimistic about the game: it shows a confidence that the game will be able to stand up on its own merits.

 

[2xDouble]

I've always said there is no justification for subscriptions. They're charging me to play a game I've already bought, and threatening to take it away from me if I don't. That's extortion.

Granted, free-to-play outright isn't much better. They get nothing up-front, so they have to make money and cover expenses through microtransactions, which means they have to make some mandatory for gameplay. Giving away an essentially broken item and then charging fees to make it useable? Outright thievery if you ask me. Or worse, they have to cut costs and minimize expenses to the point of ridiculousness, ending up with shoddy product not really worth paying for in the first place.

I like the hybrid buy-to-play model best, when handled correctly. They get purchase price up front, which means they don't need to force microtransactions on us. That gives them the freedom to make MT's completely optional. It's... still pretty much extortion, but in a good way, like PBS... or The Escapist. (heh.) They're not going to take my toys away or break them because I didn't give them more money. You know... exactly how console games work...

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

The Dungeons and Dragons Online F2P model is the best I've seen. You can either pay a sub and "rent" content, classes, races, packs and character slots, or you can make a one time payment and "own" a portion of it and never pay again. To "own" the whole game costs around 150 but if you play for at least a year that is still cheaper than 15 a month sub fees.

 

[Rawne1980]

I don't mind paying a sub at all as long as i'm enjoying the game.

I avoid F2P games. Seen too many of them become "pay to win".

 

[Ralen-Sharr]

I'll take pay to play over free to play anytime, as long as it means a level playing field. And the game is good, naturally.

There have been some really huge pay to play bombs that were horrible. P2P does not mean good game.

Free to play means you can play it for free, and if it's crap, quit and uninstall. Free to play games make no money if the game sucks because nobody sticks around to play them and pay for stuff.

Vindictus does free to play quite well. most of the premium items are cosmetic, and they have a high-polish source engine so the game looks good enough to enjoy those cosmetic items.

 

[Scrustle]

Sounds like a bit of an elitist dick to me. Also he's in the position of being directly benefiting from monthly the subscription model.

 

[Scarim Coral]

Am I missing something but ain't paying microtransactions stuff is a option? (I'm reading the above comments.) I mean it's there but at the end of the day it's you who decided to pay a little extra or not.
Ok sure the microtransactions can be unfair like when half of my character clothings from Champion Online were no longer free (I made him during the first free-to-play weekend).
Still I rather have the f2p option than the subscription (I guess he doesn't seen to know how bad the recession are).