Smedley also revealed that item sales have gone up 200 percent, proving another, more modern adage: More people will buy your product if they don't have to buy all of it. Fascinating!
Everquest 2 sees 300% player increase after going free-to-play
by Richard Mitchell 
on Jan 13th 2012 2:00AM
11
Smedley also revealed that item sales have gone up 200 percent, proving another, more modern adage: More people will buy your product if they don't have to buy all of it. Fascinating!
Reader Comments (11)
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 2:31AM DyslexicAlucard said
Does this really prove anything, though? I mean, sure more people are playing it, but now a lot less are paying a $15 monthly fee. Even if more people are buying items, is it offsetting the loss of the $15/month from before?
I'm not saying it's NOT more profitable now--just that the numbers given don't necessarily make it crystal clear if it actually is.
Reply
I'm not saying it's NOT more profitable now--just that the numbers given don't necessarily make it crystal clear if it actually is.
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 3:58AM Anticrawl said
@DyslexicAlucard
The monthly fee was pure profit. Managing servers has almost no associated costs, it is the initial cost of setting up servers where the money is needed. Which makes the monthly fee in general bullshit. We don't live in the dial-up age where computers cost so much one needed to finance it or take out a loan. They are likely making more as free to play now due to item sales being up.
Reply
The monthly fee was pure profit. Managing servers has almost no associated costs, it is the initial cost of setting up servers where the money is needed. Which makes the monthly fee in general bullshit. We don't live in the dial-up age where computers cost so much one needed to finance it or take out a loan. They are likely making more as free to play now due to item sales being up.
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 3:14AM Tiradyn said
Everquest is still, in my opinion, not only the best MMO ever, but the best video game ever. Period. That said, playing EQII for free is still overpaying. Vanguard is a much closer actual sequel to EQ, but the original is still better. EQII just sucks.
Reply
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 8:44AM Punkrawk Bbob said
@hiruuamon
Just a hunch, but I imagine it means "good". Generally speaking if you have 3x the amount of players, that's 3x the chance to get a sale. It's the difference of advertising at 8-9p on TV versus 3-4a. More exposure translates to more sales. With the servers and business running exactly the same whether there are 200k users or 600k users, it stands that more users will generate more revenue since costs remain exactly the same to maintain the game.
What's so difficult to understand here?
Reply
Just a hunch, but I imagine it means "good". Generally speaking if you have 3x the amount of players, that's 3x the chance to get a sale. It's the difference of advertising at 8-9p on TV versus 3-4a. More exposure translates to more sales. With the servers and business running exactly the same whether there are 200k users or 600k users, it stands that more users will generate more revenue since costs remain exactly the same to maintain the game.
What's so difficult to understand here?
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 9:04AM Jenks said
@hiruuamon
One of the reasons games go F2P is to increase the number of overall players, and not just the paying ones. Paying players are more likely to stick around and spend money in a game that has lots of other people milling about. The very idea of the vanity items that make up the bulk of most F2P cash shops is to show off. Who wants to play dress up in a ghost town?
Reply
One of the reasons games go F2P is to increase the number of overall players, and not just the paying ones. Paying players are more likely to stick around and spend money in a game that has lots of other people milling about. The very idea of the vanity items that make up the bulk of most F2P cash shops is to show off. Who wants to play dress up in a ghost town?
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 8:39AM fireEater said
This is likely bad news for EQ players. As an ex-devoted poxnora veteran who saw its transfer from independent to SoE owned, I feel safe in saying SoE has no idea how to run a transaction-based system. It feels like the company is run by accountants rather than game devs, and that's beyond the basic UI problems with online stores that Sony seems totally unable to acknowledge, not to mention fix.
Reply
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 9:14AM (Unverified) said
This game is not free to play at all. Not at all. It is just a big demo, and a poor one at that.
It is the only free to play game on the market that actually limits the players effectiveness vs both PC's and NPC's by forcing the player to PAY to equip the items and use the spells they find while questing.
I came back, got on my level 83 character and couldn't even swap some gear that I had previously acquired. I needed to purchase "unlockers" on a per gear/spell basis just so that I could use the items I found.
This is a horrible way to run a F2P MMO.
Moreover threads started on the SOE forum regarding this result in flames and closing of said threads. Here is a good one from Steam: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?s=6204fa9fbbfe16c32b82c217f0bd22d9&t=2280046
Check it out to see how they really limit you and why this is the worst free to play game out there. It's a good demo, but it is NOT a full game in any way.
Reply
It is the only free to play game on the market that actually limits the players effectiveness vs both PC's and NPC's by forcing the player to PAY to equip the items and use the spells they find while questing.
I came back, got on my level 83 character and couldn't even swap some gear that I had previously acquired. I needed to purchase "unlockers" on a per gear/spell basis just so that I could use the items I found.
This is a horrible way to run a F2P MMO.
Moreover threads started on the SOE forum regarding this result in flames and closing of said threads. Here is a good one from Steam: http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?s=6204fa9fbbfe16c32b82c217f0bd22d9&t=2280046
Check it out to see how they really limit you and why this is the worst free to play game out there. It's a good demo, but it is NOT a full game in any way.
Posted: Jan 13th 2012 9:18AM (Unverified) said
@(Unverified)
I meant to say its a good demo in the sense that it lets you access a lot of the games content, but not in any other way. The fact that they limit your gear and spells in these ways make it a poor demo as well.
Sorry. I get -1 for proofing :-)
I would rather they limit the areas we could access but have use of all our gear/spells. Then we could purchase area unlocks, etc. Paying $8 just to put on a few pieces of gear you found is ridiculous. Purely ridiculous.
Reply
I meant to say its a good demo in the sense that it lets you access a lot of the games content, but not in any other way. The fact that they limit your gear and spells in these ways make it a poor demo as well.
Sorry. I get -1 for proofing :-)
I would rather they limit the areas we could access but have use of all our gear/spells. Then we could purchase area unlocks, etc. Paying $8 just to put on a few pieces of gear you found is ridiculous. Purely ridiculous.
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
Persona 3, Tactics Ogre, and other PSP RPGs that will live on my Vita
Posted on Feb 22nd 2012 5:45PM
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Rumor: Japanese Vita devs jumping ship, Sony responds 124 comments
- Buy 2 get 1 free on select Vita games at GameStop starting today 114 comments
- Sony's Rohde: proprietary Vita cards 'completely necessary' to combat piracy 112 comments
- Sony: Call of Duty blasting onto Vita this fall 89 comments
- Asura's Wrath review: Wrecking the curve 84 comments
