free mplayer seems to be a thing of the past

faded glory · May 30, 2002, 22:45

So whats this? I read an article in Maximum PC that projects by 2004, most all of gamesites will have already gone p2p (pay to play). The inner circle at Zone.com are already discussing this now. People just dont seem to be clicking the advertisments. So they have realeased Halfway (no ads and special text for small fee. Plus membership) And gamespy, Heat.net has implemented somthing similiar. But no matter what it doesnt seem to be working. Revenues have fallen off a cliff since the places opened. There are serouis discussion to make these sites "Subscription based" or they will have to go under. Places like Sony Station and Mplayer.com have already went under or charged a fee for some of there services.

So? Does this threaten to ruin the mplayer gaming industry? Would you pay for mplayer services?

Discuss..... fee, or no mp

General Ludd · May 30, 2002, 22:56

Those sites don't host multiplayer games, they just act as a match making service. People can do that anywhere else, and only a moron would pay for such a service.

Let them charge money, I don't care. I rarely use any of those crap sites anyways.

tniem · May 30, 2002, 23:02

Hmmm, I have wondered the same thing with Blizzard making a pay for service with Worlds of WarCraft - of course that is an online MMRPG and as par for the course it is expected to pay.

I think what it means is that if there are not free services for RTS games and such that there will be a new way to do this. Sites such as Apolyton for whatever the said game is will be places to find matches. Chat rooms will be designated as other places to find games. Then once a game is found, one player will be the host and others will log on to play on his IP Address. I know I will not pay to play online RTS games, Diablo II, or sports games. All those games are fun against opponents but it is not worth paying money to play. So I will simply play single player or find people that are willing to play with me on my host.

SnowFire · May 30, 2002, 23:07

The best way to do this is to sell something first, and THEN have the service be free. Look at Myth or Starcraft- you pay 40 bucks for a game, but then have free match-making provided as part of the cost of admission.
I don't see having to pay to play Diablo II online even a remote possibility.

Mr. President · May 31, 2002, 00:26

I don't particularly care one way or the other, since I don't really like multiplayer; but my instincts are that it should be free.

Asher · May 31, 2002, 01:42

Multiplayer as a matchmaking service (p2p usually means peer to peer, not pay to play) will probably be free.

As bandwidth costs rise, "servers" like Battle.net being free are a thing of the past.

Companies simply cannot profit when they're paying enormous bills constantly to provide a service many users demand be "free", which is anything but.

faded glory · May 31, 2002, 17:52

"Those sites don't host multiplayer games, they just act as a match making service. People can do that anywhere else, and only a moron would pay for such a service. "

Yes but it can be an absolute ***** to set up a large scale IP game. And hakf of the people out there arent even sure how to find there IP address. I agree, I would never pay for Gamespy's service just so I can enter a dark lobby and set up an 8 player Civ3 game. However, I looked at how hard it is too get a Warcraft or Red Alert game goin via IP....it just is almost impossible

Adagio · June 1, 2002, 08:48

I wouldn't Pay a fee every month just to be able to play the game, during that month...I would prefer to pay more money when buying the game (in the stores) and then be able to play without worrying if you may play the game online or not...

Lemmy · June 1, 2002, 10:05

there will always be free mp games, just as there will always be free single player games, but the i do think that most of the games that are free now, will be charged for later, but new games, and companies will take their place.

I myself wouldn't pay a mothly fee for a game, at least not now..

tniem · June 1, 2002, 22:48

One question I have is that we all hear that the cost of bandwith is increasing. What I am unsure of is if the actual cost is increasing or if it is there are more online users using bandwith thus driving up the total cost to websites? Maybe Mark or Dan can give light.

It would seem that economics would make the price be decreasing yet this has not been happening from what I have been hearing.

faded glory · June 3, 2002, 14:58

I have no idea about the bandwith cost. I just know that people arent clickig on the ads. Which is a damn shame, cause I dont think I wanna pay a subscription to play Civ3 or any other games.

What we need is a giant IP playing site and forum on the net that covers all games, so all players can get together on a forum and arrange games. Thats not a bad idea.

Boris Godunov · June 3, 2002, 22:23

Will the day come when game designers will design their products so you can ONLY play MP through their sites and paying a fee?

Oh wait, they do... Ultima Online, Everquest...

faded glory · June 4, 2002, 00:54

Those are all lifestyles not games.

And the game i play alot (wwiionline), charges 10.00 a month to play.

theres lots of advantages for this tho. Shitloads of updates and tweaks. The game basically evolves. When I first started playing the men were shitty blocks and panzers flew. Its like 50 times better now.

Ari Rahikkala · June 4, 2002, 01:30

As far as I know mplayer should stay free for a long time...