test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Question-- If STO were F2P............

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
What would be the positives and what would be the negatives??
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Only positive I can think of right off the top of my head.

    A final end to these kinds of threads.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    captnwan wrote: »
    Only positive I can think of right off the top of my head.

    A final end to these kinds of threads.

    Indeed.


    Just end this thread right here please.

    The Devs have even said they have no intention on making STO F2P anytime soon.

    And is it really that hard to not notice the many other F2P clone threads.... :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    It would let more people that are Fans of Star Trek play the game that are not welling to pay for it. With this there could be more Trek Fans making things in the Foundry.

    The bad this would be it could end up taking away cash from Cryptic and there for STO would get less content. But this could also go the other way and Cryptic could get more cash because more people may be welling to pay for more things in the C-Store.

    As it is I do not see them going to a Free to Play set up at this time. There was a point when I did this STO should and would be going free to play but now that they have did a lot of work on STO and more people seem to be playing the game then there was 6 months ago.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Honestly, I don't want to see STO go to F2P for my own reasons. However, I simply wanted to understand what benefits and what pitfalls would occur IF it did go that route.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Hey, guess what? There is a 51 page thread stickied at the top of this forum discussing that very subject. Here is a link:

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?t=185819

    That said, the model that STO will eventually adopt is not strictly F2P, it is a hybrid. If still has a monthly subscription option that grants access to all content plus includes a monthly allotment of points for the C-store, which is something you dont currently get now. The only difference is it also includes a "free" option that offers access to less of the game. In a nutshell, nothing changes for the people who already have monthly subs; you actually get more than you do now. This is the same model Champions Online will be adopting early this year, and the one STO will be adopting sometime thereafter.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Positive point it would bring more players in the game for awhile. The negative points most of them would be really young couldn't do a lot of the content and would beg for energy credits or run troughs.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    If you go to wikipedia and search MMO and scroll to the bottom. Two different gaming surveys have been conducted in the USA and UK. It was determined the average amount spent per month by a subscriber to an MMO was $15.10 dollars. This was for both subscription based games and free to play games. They come out to be the same in the end.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    The Devs have even said they have no intention on making STO F2P anytime soon.
    No, they said they have no plans, not no intention. There's a difference. I intend to go to the Moon one day, but I have no plans on how I'll get there.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    I'd worry if the game turned into F2P. What's the incentive towards developing a game that makes you no money?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Positive would be I don't have to see so many "experts" predict how this game is going to turn out.

    Experts who don't know how search works that is.......
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Well... that answers that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Well... that answers that.

    Yep. The reason Cryptic is making Champs F2P is because they think it will make them more money that the current model is. And if it does, STO will almost certainly follow. The reason is simple: Cryptic is going to do whatever makes the most money.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    If STO were F2P....

    The forums would be exploding with threads from people crying that those who pay for subscriptions get more stuff than those who don't.

    The forums would also be exploding with threads about how to make the F2P experience better. They will all involve F2Pers getting the same stuff as those that pay for a subscription.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    If STO were F2P....

    The forums would be exploding with threads from people crying that those who pay for subscriptions get more stuff than those who don't.

    The forums would also be exploding with threads about how to make the F2P experience better. They will all involve F2Pers getting the same stuff as those that pay for a subscription.

    Actually. Its very likely that there would be boards that the free players couldnt post on. Furthermore, Cryptic is only going to do what makes them the most money. So theres no way they will ever give free accounts as much as paid accounts, because that would mean less money for them. Its common "cents" (see what I did there?) ;)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Yep. The reason Cryptic is making Champs F2P is because they think it will make them more money that the current model is. And if it does, STO will almost certainly follow. The reason is simple: Cryptic is going to do whatever makes the most money.

    Another reason is: They own the Champions IP, lock stock and barrel, meaning they can test the Cryptic F2P model without any other party being involved.

    With STO - they are just a license holder and I'm sure CBS has a lot of say in any major change they do to STO (and going with a hybrid F2P model would be a major change; so I'm sure CBS would have cioncerns and input were Cryptic to propose a F2P change.)

    That said, if it turns out to work well for CO; I could see Cryptic making a proposal to CBS, and using the CO results as evidence it would boost profits (assuming that were the case for CO as the CO F2P is still in closed beta; and not at all Live yet.)

    The LARGEST negative to STO would be that all development would shift to making STO ready for F2P; and if the CO model is anything to go by, that would take 4 to 6 months of development where that would be the main focus of the Dev team until the F2P version of STO launched - so basically, at least one full 'Season Update' worth of Dev Team time would be totally devoted to making, doing full testing of, and launching of STO F2P, were they to one day do it; (and again, at this time, all indications are that they ARE NOT consiodering shifting STO to a F2P model at all.)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Yep. The reason Cryptic is making Champs F2P is because they think it will make them more money that the current model is. And if it does, STO will almost certainly follow. The reason is simple: Cryptic is going to do whatever makes the most money.

    u forget atari is a co partner in this game its not just cryptic n cbs atari gets 60% of all its money FROM STO as of right now n the devs said that THEY HAVE NOT N R NOT talking at all bout taking this game F2P this question was answered by stahl himself on STOKED
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    It makes sense that subscribers get more than F2P users. You get what you pay for. Same with lifetime subscribers, beta testers and pre-orders. Put the extra time and resources, get the extra reward.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Armsman wrote: »
    Another reason is: They own the Champions IP, lock stock and barrel, meaning they can test the Cryptic F2P model without any other party being involved.

    Since Atari owns Cryptic, doesnt that mean Atari REALLY owns it?
    Armsman wrote: »
    With STO - they are just a license holder and I'm sure CBS has a lot of say in any major change they do to STO (and going with a hybrid F2P model would be a major change; so I'm sure CBS would have cioncerns and input were Cryptic to propose a F2P change.)

    That said, if it turns out to work well for CO; I could see Cryptic making a proposal to CBS, and using the CO results as evidence it would boost profits (assuming that were the case for CO as the CO F2P is still in closed beta; and not at all Live yet.)

    Oh yes, that is obviously how it will play out. No disagreement there at all.
    Armsman wrote: »
    The LARGEST negative to STO would be that all development would shift to making STO ready for F2P; and if the CO model is anything to go by, that would take 4 to 6 months of development where that would be the main focus of the Dev team until the F2P version of STO launched - so basically, at least one full 'Season Update' worth of Dev Team time would be totally devoted to making, doing full testing of, and launching of STO F2P, were they to one day do it; (and again, at this time, all indications are that they ARE NOT consiodering shifting STO to a F2P model at all.)

    Yep, that is a downside. Fortunately by the time that were to happen the Foundry would have been live for quite some time, and considering how many awesome missions have been made so far on Tribble, there will be a huge amount by then on live. Unfortunately, Champs doesnt have a Foundry system to help them get through it. But hopefully the increased revenue from the F2P conversion will fuel increased development and mean more content in the long run.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Akkarin23 wrote: »
    u forget atari is a co partner in this game its not just cryptic n cbs atari gets 60% of all its money FROM STO as of right now n the devs said that THEY HAVE NOT N R NOT talking at all bout taking this game F2P this question was answered by stahl himself on STOKED

    I didnt forget anything. And they obviously are "talking" about it:

    http://forums.startrekonline.com/showthread.php?p=2832102#post2832102

    http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/11/06/star-trek-online-could-go-free-to-play.aspx
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Actually. Its very likely that there would be boards that the free players couldnt post on. Furthermore, Cryptic is only going to do what makes them the most money. So theres no way they will ever give free accounts as much as paid accounts, because that would mean less money for them. Its common "cents" (see what I did there?) ;)


    I understand that, and you're correct. I'm not a tester, but it looks like Cryptic is doing a good job of sticking to their guns where Champions F2P is concerned. When F2P was announced, the CO F2P forum was overflowing with the kinds of posts I mentioned.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Seems to me, however, that F2P is applied to dying games. STO is, from what I can tell, going very strongly with no hint of dying. Is my perception off?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Seems to me, however, that F2P is applied to dying games. STO is, from what I can tell, going very strongly with no hint of dying. Is my perception off?

    Until recently, that seems to have been how it worked. For example, Dungeons and Dragons Online wasnt doing so well. So Turbine decided to make a last ditch effort to keep it alive by taking it F2P. Luckily for them, it paid off big time. Then that got them to thinking; even though their other game Lord of the Rings Online was doing fine(with more subs than STO has), they thought if they made it F2P they could make even more money that it was already making; so they did. And as my links in my previous post showed, it has doubled their revenue.

    Cryptic is in a very similar situation with its two games. Champs isnt doing so well, so their doing the same thing Turbine did with DDO. If it goes well, their very likely going to do the same thing with STO that Turbine did with LOTRO. While the decision to make DDO and Champs F2P was based on poor performance, the decision to make LOTRO and eventually STO F2P will be to make even MORE money from them; not to save them from dying.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Seems to me, however, that F2P is applied to dying games. STO is, from what I can tell, going very strongly with no hint of dying. Is my perception off?

    Yes. For example, while DDO was dying, LOTRO wasn't dying when it switched to F2P. Both are going better than before now.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Thanks for the clarification.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Star Trek Online is Atari's largest single source of revenue currently.

    So it ain't going F2P any time soon, no matter how many of these threads ya'll make.

    If you can't afford the subscription price then may I respectfully suggest that you get a job.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Star Trek Online is Atari's largest single source of revenue currently.

    So it ain't going F2P any time soon, no matter how many of these threads ya'll make.

    If you can't afford the subscription price then may I respectfully suggest that you get a job.

    I agree with you it most likely won't change. I think people are confused about F2P versus subscription based games. F2P will give very basic abilties but allow you to play. They make their money by offering upgrades and special items in a store they control. If you want to do good and win, you'll spend the money for those items. In subscription, they give you almost everything to play with. In our case, certain items are in C store but nothing there is the ultimate weapon to must have. You can play this game and never go to c store.

    Quoted from a wikipeida -
    British online gamers are outspending their European counterparts according to a recently released study commissioned by Gamesindustry.com and TNS. The UK MMO-market is now worth £195 million in 2009 compared to the £165 million and £145 million spent by German and French online gamers.[18]

    The US gamers are still no 1, however, spending about $3.8 billion dollars overall on MMO games. $1.8 billion of that money is spent on monthly subscription fees. The money spent averages out to $15.10 between both subscription and free-to-play MMO gamers. The study also found that 46% of 46 mil players in the US pays real money to play MMO games.

    Today’s Gamers MMO Focus Report, published in March 2010, was commissioned by TNS and gamesindustry.com. A similar study for the UK market-only (UK National Gamers Survey Report)[19] was released in February 2010 by the same groups.
    No matter what style they offer, they will make their money and profit because they are a buisness offering entertainment.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    I'd worry if the game turned into F2P. What's the incentive towards developing a game that makes you no money?

    You've never heard of DnD online or Lord of the Rings ONline, have you? Both F2P, both cash cows.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Armsman wrote: »
    The LARGEST negative to STO would be that all development would shift to making STO ready for F2P....

    Since most STO development seems to be nothing more than Cstore content and making players make their own content, what's the difference?
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited January 2011
    Star Trek Online is Atari's largest single source of revenue currently.

    So it ain't going F2P any time soon, no matter how many of these threads ya'll make.

    If you can't afford the subscription price then may I respectfully suggest that you get a job.

    Actually, thats the very reason it WILL be going F2P; they want to get even MORE milk from their cash cow:

    http://www.joystiq.com/2010/10/07/lord-of-the-rings-online-doubles-revenue-since-going-free-to-pla/

    http://www.joystiq.com/2010/03/02/turbine-makes-more-money-by-giving-its-mmo-away-for-free/

    Your right about one thing though; it has nothing to do with how many threads are posted. What really matters is how well Champs does:

    http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/11/06/star-trek-online-could-go-free-to-play.aspx
Sign In or Register to comment.