
I push this idea as much as I can here at MMO Fallout, but the old adage that free to play was a last ditch effort by subscription titles that were tanking died when Dungeons and Dragons Online pulled off the transition, and proved to the industry that throwing in a cash shop wasn’t just a way to stave off death for another few months, but rather a way to revitalize a game, boost the community, and (in the case of Lord of the Rings Online) cause a successful game to become even more successful. That being said, I find myself in a lot of arguments with hardcore loyalists to the Guild Wars games who claim that the business model (buy to play) is “wildly successful,” and is something the entire industry should adopt. What they don’t pay attention to is that Guild Wars brings in a whole 2% income for NCsoft. If NCsoft were to switch all of their games to buy to play, their profits would plummet to around 10% of what they are making now, assuming similar sales to Guild Wars.
So Massively had an article where NCsoft’s Jeremy Gaffney states that subscriptions are “probably” more profitable than microtransactions.
“There’s still a lot of money being made in subscriptions right now. Worldwide there’s a lot of money being made in [micro]transactions, but there’s probably a bit more money really being made in subscriptions worldwide,”
I’m sure the boots are quaking at Turbine (with their paltry double income from LotRO, and 500% increase in DDO), Cryptic (with their laughably small 1,000% increase in revenue), and Nexon (who posted over 50% increase in revenue over last year), not to mention Sony Online Entertainment, Gala-Net, T3fun, GamersFirst, Perfect World Entertainment, and the host of other companies who have found solace in the cash shop model.
Gaffney is correct in one sense, there is still a lot of money to be made in subscriptions, and both business models are equally viable. As for subscriptions bringing in more revenue than cash shops, I’m going to have to request Gaffney show me the money.



