[Theorycrafting] Revamped All Access and F2P Model.

Discussion in 'General Gameplay Discussion' started by Benito, Jun 5, 2020.

  1. Melt Actually plays the game

    I'm not interested in running around the forums locking threads willy nilly. You have ideas that I believe are detrimental to the overall health of the game, which you disagree with. So we discuss. My views on who you are have nothing to do with it. I've never posted in the EQ2Wire forums. I've only ever read a single thread there, which was previously mentioned. So, back to the topic at hand, why do you think that F2Ps are the biggest scourge on this game?
    Tegdaian and Dude like this.
  2. Benito Ancient EQ2 Player: Lavastorm Server 2004.

    Same people, different forum accounts? Please don't waste anyone's time.
  3. Melt Actually plays the game

    You want to discuss the point of the thread that you yourself started or just keep posting the same message over and over?

    Also I've got like 1200 messages on this account and have been active for the past like 4 years. Not sure who you think I am, but...
    Kheldar and Dude like this.
  4. Tegdaian Member

    answer the questions Benito, they are perfectly valid and I want to know the answers.



    Kheldar, parissa, CSP84 and 3 others like this.
  5. Dude Well-Known Member

    Just saying that over and over doesn't make it so or help your case.

    You made a proposal. I asked for data that would support your conclusion. You can't provide it, unless you have access to company proprietary data. That's all I was saying. Your proposal might be the most amazing thing ever. It also might be the death of the game. Without data to support your proposal, it's impossible to say and, therefor, completely irrelevant.
    Kheldar, AOE1, Breanna and 4 others like this.
  6. Benito Ancient EQ2 Player: Lavastorm Server 2004.



    I could write an airtight argument but this clique will never been satisfied because it doesn't fit their worldview. I've pretty much learned to disengage whenever this clique gets involved. (I was engaged with Tanto because he does not seem to be associated with the clique).

    The way Snikkety and Dude describes my interactions on a third party site shows that their motives are hardly academic and sincere but rather biased and probably nefarious (to get this thread devolved to a lock).

    They could have fooled me if they had the self-control not to mention that third party site.
  7. Melt Actually plays the game

    If you can write an airtight argument, why haven't you?
    Kheldar, AOE1, parissa and 2 others like this.
  8. Tegdaian Member

    Answer the questions Benito, or just stop posting here. this is not a game you even play, and at this point Darkpaw is not going to change anything about the structure of the Free to Play aspects. they have better things to spend their time on.

    So, again, Answer the questions, they are perfectly valid, and not answering them only shows that you are unwilling or unable to carry on a conversation about this subject. your views are not the only ones in this world, so there are always going to be people who disagree with you, sometimes vehemently. do not let this discourage you from attempting to hold a conversation on something.
    However, a conversation is a two way street, and if you are unable to listen to views opposite your own without acting like the world is out to get you, then you need to stop putting yourself out in a public forum.
    Kheldar and parissa like this.
  9. Benito Ancient EQ2 Player: Lavastorm Server 2004.


    Did you see my interactions with Tanto? Even though I disagree with him on multiple points, the exchange was civil. I consciously chose not to attack him on certain points (population, etc) because it would turn unpleasant. I appreciate that it was kept within certain boundaries.

    There is a clique that hates my guts. They say it openly on their forums and Discord. Dreamweaver has asked that I exercise ignore. Some of them are probably on different forum accounts to circumvent this general rule. (They lack the self-control to fool me).

    I am limiting the drama by disengaging. I do not want to test the forum moderator or rules.

    I am bringing a pause to this discussion for the time being.
  10. Tegdaian Member

    the questions have nothing to do with anything outside of this thread. they are valid and stand on their own, and I am curious as to what your answers are. Enlighten us.
    1. How many people/active accounts play EQ2?
    2. How many of those active accounts are F2P?
    3. How much money, outside of purchasing expansions, do owners of those F2P accounts spend?
    4. Given the difference between the current model and your proposed model, how much more/less would DPG make on EQ2?
    Kheldar and Dude like this.
  11. Dude Well-Known Member

    I don't hate you. I don't even know you and I don't know what happened to you on the "third party site." I suggested that you go there because the last time I was there, it seemed like mostly former players disagreeing with the course of the current game. You seemed to also disagree with the course of the current game and were concerned about the level of moderation here (both of those things still seem to be true). That's all. Nothing more. No big conspiracy.

    In terms of your idea here, I think I've been pretty clear ... you have come to a conclusion that I believe is impossible to reach without accurate data. If you have that data, then provide it and we can have a discussion. Without data, your "proposal" is more of a "hey wouldn't it be cool if" type of idea, instead of something concrete. I have to imagine that the people making business decisions have looked at all the variables and are making business decisions based on the data. Changing course is going to take something more concrete than a "hey wouldn't it be cool" type of idea.
    Kheldar, Breanna and Tegdaian like this.
  12. Melt Actually plays the game

    Here's the deal:

    I think that you're wrong about how much money is lost on F2P players. The amount of money that a single whale spends is equivalent to 150-200 subscriptions with nothing else, and there are a great many whales. We have no data, so we can't say, but unless there are 200x as many F2Ps as there are whales, their profit margins will not improve.

    If you have any civil refutation, let it be known.
    Dude likes this.
  13. Tanto Done, finished, gone.

    The only question I have an answer for (as Benito is refusing to play), is active accounts. And it's a guess based on historical tracking of numbers of characters at max level, and numbers of characters finishing the signature line, divided by a rough guess at how many alts each account has on average. So it's rough data, and it's not me who's collected this data. I think (without bothering the people who did), it was estimated about 5k active accounts across all servers.

    I expect someone in the EQ2wire community is able to make a more accurate guess as they probably delve deeper into the census, but this was what we are/were looking at, a couple of months ago. I daresay the persistent lag and bugs may have shifted the number downwards a bit.
    Kheldar and Dude like this.
  14. Evguenil62 Well-Known Member

    Why asking questions that nobody can answer over and over?

    I think that F2P model has at least two purposes:
    - increase game population which is a good thing for all-access members
    - give people easy access to game and convert those who like the game into all-access members
  15. Tkia Well-Known Member

    That would be because your responses are heavy on supposition and totally devoid of facts.
    Kheldar and Dude like this.
  16. parissa Well-Known Member

    Two things...
    1. They need a forum section like they used to have for OTHER... This thread isn't really about gameplay... It started out about your personal opinion on how daybreak should change their membership... Why I have no clue... And now we are to tinfoil hat conspiracy theories... Seriously I doubt anyone would waste that much time trying to get you banned...
    2. You wouldn't by chance be related to that one girl from halls of fate who could get the whole server into a frenzy

    And yes I did actually read what you wrote about the F2P and you were taking many things that players either paid for or earned.... Our memberships are fine.... Find something else to pick on... I have 3 membership accounts and 3 ftp accounts that I activate during certain holidays ... I would walk away from all 6 if daybreak even considered what you were talking about...
    Kheldar and Dude like this.
  17. LlyranKeen Member

    This thread doesn't make any sense to me. F2P matters enough that changes need to be made, but doesn't really matter enough to make a difference? That seems to be the tone of some of the posts.

    Does anyone even know how many active F2P accounts there are?
    Does anyone know how many of those accounts spend money on kronos or the cash shop?
    Does anyone know how many F2P accounts are tied to paid accounts or are separate players all together?
    Does anyone know how much the average active F2P account might spend in relation to the average subbed account?
    Does anyone know how many subbed accounts are actually actively playing EQ2?
    Has anyone who actually has numbers done a cost analysis concerning whether making changes similar to those proposed would even be worth the expenditure of resources and man hours?
    Are there any metrics indicating that such changes would actually positively effect retention or revenue?

    So many questions and I see none of them being answered.
    AOE1 and Dude like this.
  18. Avirodar Well-Known Member

    [IMG]

    Significant changes to EQ2's monetization after this long, would be like trying to put the toothpaste back inside the tube.

    Reasons why:
    - If it caused a reduction in revenue, EQ2 risks being shuttered sooner.
    - If it caused a gain in revenue, funds would not go back into EQ2.
    - People who have already left because of EQ2's monetization model are unlikely to return.
    - People who currently play, and do not like the change, are more likely to leave.

    Overall, there is a lot more risk than potential reward.

    Despite my belief that SOE's implementation of FTP in EQ2 was a flop that hurt the game overall, I don't believe it is viable for EQ2 to try making significant monetization adjustments in 2020. That's unless it was accompanied by a large increase of Dev staff, and a complete engine/code overhaul, in conjunction with a mechanics/stats/itemization overhaul, to actually entice players to return. And that isn't going to happen.
    Kheldar, AOE1 and Snikkety like this.
  19. AOE1 Well-Known Member



    Not going to happen nor should it. Your talking way too many changes that are just not practical in a game this old.
  20. Benito Ancient EQ2 Player: Lavastorm Server 2004.

    To keep this thread civil, I won't answer the "gotcha [data] questions." It also means I won't impose the same expectations for respondents here.

    As a thought experiment, let us accept the premise that the game is funded by whales (T1 raiders) in the cash shop, the fact that gear become obsolete with each expansion logically means that there will be diminishing returns and the perception that they are not getting the same "bang for the buck." The guy spending $3000 will get discouraged or fatigued that he will need to go through that ritual annually. Furthermore, whales can take breaks or retire which makes them not a reliable/resilient revenue stream in the long term.

    By contrast, the low-medium level player base is probably more reliable and resilient. For instance, EQ1's Aradune TLP is fielding more than 2000 players online at peak (5 General chats with a capacity of 400 each). This is shows how the wider playerbase can be Daybreak/Darkpaw's bread-and-butter.

    Edit: I will be pausing my responses from time to time to keep this thread civil. I was accused of trying to lock my own thread in the past. lol.