Inexact Parallels

LotRO goes F2P. I think, “The game is about to get a huge funding infusion.”

EQ2 goes F2P. I think, “I always meant to try that, but I would hate to jump onto a sinking ship, and it looks like SOE wants to milk the last dollars from a dying game.”

This is even before considering their differing price shop models. I cannot promise that it is a fair pair of reactions, but I do not think I am in the minority in my estimation of whether each game is headed up or down.

: Zubon

10 thoughts on “Inexact Parallels”

  1. I think it’s not inevitable, and EQ2X can do very well indeed. If it ditches the separation between sub servers and F2P servers. Otherwise I have no idea what’s going on there.

    Trouble is (my view only), the sub players are always going to be the core of the community. F2P people by their nature will be less attached to the game, more likely to come and go. You really want both of those people playing together.

  2. The Freeport server is heaving. Extremely busy all the time.

    Mrs Bhagpuss and I started characters there on launch day, expecting to play for a week or two then go back to our Live characters but instead we’ve played almost exclusively on Freeport.

    In my opinion the ruleset on EQ2X is just much better than the EQ2Live ruleset. If they really want to make money they should just convert all the servers to the new model.

  3. EQ2’s seems more reactionary while Turbine already has a F2P model in DDO.

    Honestly? I actually bought EQ2 and subbed after it went F2P. I know, I’m odd, but it made me more curious about the game and I really didn’t like the restrictions I saw on the free server. It seemed like you could get more for the same price on a sub server. With my paladin in WoW basically being a rogue, this may be my new home.

    1. I did the exact same thing with LOTRO : p $30 for 3 months + 1500 TP seemed like a deal compared to the constant nickel and diming that is the FTP model there.

    2. Same here. I looked at EQ2 because of the free to play buzz, priced it out, decided to buy the game and do the subscription. I didn’t go F2P, but it made me consider it again, and this time I decided to try it. Having fun with it as well.

  4. I would gander your impression was made up about both titles (perhaps with the same impression) before the F2P announcements. When Lotro went F2P I thought ‘at least I can trial the game longer than 10 days’ (my previous limitations on my 3 shots in that game) and with EQ2/X (whatever) it was ‘now I can see more than the starter island’.

  5. Zubon, my reaction was pretty much the same as yours. Turbine seems to have the f2p model well thought out but it felt like Sony was just grasping at straws. It might not actually be that way, but it’s the impression that I’m left with.

  6. I dunno. I wouldn’t have the impression of EQ2 as a sinking ship; I assume it’s SOE’s one healthy horse, actually.

    I saw the F2P there of (quite sensible) bandwagonning… but I’ll be god damned if SOE didn’t manage to Do It Wrong. /rolleyes

  7. I’m a currently player in EQ2X and I played LOTRO a bit several months back.

    I have to say, if you’re going to compare the two, SOE is allowing its F2P players a hell of a lot more choice, selection and viability to reach max level with minimal cost, whereas LOTRO pretty much charges you for all of the content beyond the beginning areas, if I understand their model right.

    I love the EQ2X model, and I think that F2P is definitely the future of gaming, with the exception of whoever the 900 lb gorilla is at the moment (WOW being that gorilla right now). The only real way to draw people from a game their friends all play (and that’s WOW’s draw, far and away above all else), is to say “Look, you can have a comparable product over here for less; tell your friends.”

    And it looks like it’s (F2P) working for everyone; Turbine, SOE — it’s expanding the available market in a way that nothing else would, and it’s paying off.

Comments are closed.