Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

General: Why You Should Embrace the F2P Movement

1246

Comments

  • karmathkarmath Member UncommonPosts: 904

    I love how people think 'change' is a good thing. If something works stick to it. 'Change' can be a very bad thing.

    Every single last F2P game I have played have been rubbish in comparison to the vast majority of sub model games. Whats worse they expect you to pay more than the usual 15 buck sub for stuff that your gimp without.

     

    Please fire the idiot who wrote this he is obviously taking a chop out from a company thats trying to push f2p.

  • RemyVorenderRemyVorender Member RarePosts: 3,991

    Having to pay to do more quests in one day, or unlock a zone, or, whatever other crude ways devs of F2P games come up with to syphon every last penny out of you have zero appeal to me. I'll always be glad to pay a monthly fee and knowing I can play the WHOLE game, without stopping every hour to get my wallet out.

     

    F2P is only cheaper if you don't want to either A: do everything the game has to offer, or B: not win. F2P is, by design, supposed to be more expensive than a sub model in order to counter-balance those that don't pay a dime and just mindlessly dink along.

     

    F2P is a fad, and I've been saying it since it started. What we will be left with is movement back to the sub model with a cash shop for cosmetic/pointless items. the OP must of known full well he was gonna get torched, even while typing this post up. lol...

     

    F2P = NoF'ingWay

    Joined - July 2004

  • crofirencrofiren Member UncommonPosts: 2

    And if you try again and like it you can max your char to the limit of ''f2p'' and then if you aren't bored yet you pay to continue

  • BurntvetBurntvet Member RarePosts: 3,465

    Originally posted by Malickie

    Originally posted by Burntvet

    I hate P2W.

    I hate cash shops.

    I hate gated content and so called "velvet ropes".

    I hate the same boring grinder, over and over.

    I hate games being designed with mechincs in place  to force people to use the cash shop.

     

    So... I hate F2P and probably always will.

     

    I will not embrace (not) F2P.

    If a game is not worth my time, it certainly is not worth my money.

    What about the hybrids that have been coming to light recently?

    In which you can just go the age old sub route and avoid all of this?

    No offense but I could picture Grumpy Smurf writing the above, lol. Yeah, I'm a child of the 80's.

    I'd be a lot more impressed with the hybrid models (by which I assume you mean DDO and LOTRO with EQ2 coming) if they were not "failures" as straight up sub games, or running out of gas to the point that a radical readjustment of pricing model was an almost no risk proposition. (Smed especially has been trying to wring every dollar out of his stable, befoe it all goes to the glue factory)



    That having been said, I can't say that would always be the case, but, cash shops also went in at the same time. So, that alone is basically enough for me to not play, in almost all cases. I have heard all the blah blah blah from companies saying "There are no critical items in the cash shop, or none that effect game play" and inevitably some of those go in, the temptation is too great and the companies end up seeing $$$. P2W is what gets people to spend in the cash shop.



    In the end, for me, if a game is good enough for me to want to spend my time playing, I have no problem paying the sub.



    The F2P gimmicks are all there to: get more people initially into the game to try it and potentially use the cash shop/velvet rope (which I generally don't care about)  or to soak people for more than a typical monthly sub fee (which I really don't care for).



    Either way,  people that like F2Ps can play them. I won't.

    And furthermore, if it is a choice between F2P and nothing, if that is the way the industry is going, I'll take nothing. I am not playing an MMO right now while I wait for something good to come along, and I am fine with that.



     

  • PaRoXiTiCPaRoXiTiC Member UncommonPosts: 603

    The only Free 2 Play game I have ever played was Knight Online. If all Free 2 Play models fell into that category then I would love it. You access to full game content and gear even if you do not pay a single dime. Paying to play this game only speeds up your amount of in game currency and leveling. It also provides nifty things in the shop that allow you to get a tiny little edge on the competition, but not enough to make the Free 2 Play players that worried or overmatched. Free 2 Play would be great if you can have access to FULL game content. Just make it a grind for the people who don't pay. That way they can still in enjoy the FULL game it just will take longer. In turn people usually spend money to move things along faster like they do in KO.

  • YamotaYamota Member UncommonPosts: 6,593

    F2P games allow gamers to get advantage over other players, not by mastering the game, but rather by opening their wallets.

    This goes against any notion of competetive gaming. Imagine if Starcraft 2 or any competetive, non-MMOG allowed you to build better units and faster if you paid more money than your opponents. People would take to the streets.

    Yet for MMORPGs we are to accept this nonsense? Yeah, I dont think so.

    F2P is inherently a bad thing and no argument can change that fact.

  • ThorqemadaThorqemada Member UncommonPosts: 1,282

    Well, if the benchmark/reason for playing a MMO is not about some kind of "FUN" but about an obsession to "EXCEL" over any other player in the game an item shop may force some people to spend huge amounts of money which is good at all bcs so many more can play free for fun.

    That way F2P is inherently a good thing.

    "Torquemada... do not implore him for compassion. Torquemada... do not beg him for forgiveness. Torquemada... do not ask him for mercy. Let's face it, you can't Torquemada anything!"

    MWO Music Video - What does the Mech say: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF6HYNqCDLI
    Johnny Cash - The Man Comes Around: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0x2iwK0BKM

  • Lexe01Lexe01 Member Posts: 97

    4.) Less Stress on the Wallet: The only thing  you are doing is making your playerbase game-hoppers. You play for a few levels, you run into the inevitable limitations which all F2P's have. And there you are, are you gonna buy that 25$ mount or hop along to the next game ? Personally I play alot of MMO's and being forced to buy consumables disgusts me. So yeah, I hop to the next F2P, CB or OB.

    'Freeloader' players are cannonfodder for ppl who actually go through the itemmall, that is the essence of a F2P MMO.

    3.) Some Real Quality for Cheap: 90% of the F2P's are 'cute' MMO's which is an excuse for having little content and even less details or graphics ingame.

    2.) Change: Trying to take a piece of the market with the least possible effort or cost isn't called change, it's called a disease or a plague.

    1.) The Games Can Survive Longer: Maybe, but your playerbase is raw sewage. Same as point 4. Ppl hop games way more often, are less drawn into the community and don't need to think about their reputation like in P2P subscription games. Stealing drops, scamming ppl, all that kind of grief will skyrocket.

  • KhalathwyrKhalathwyr Member UncommonPosts: 3,133

    Don't really need to read it. I respect Bill Murphy the man but I don't agree with the topic of this article. But I guess older players who are just fine with the subscription model fall prey to the same thing you see in society regarding older people. Their preferences just get tossed out the window with a "who gives a crap" flair in lieu of "the new thing". Then they get berated and called "nostalgic" and accused of wearing "rose colored glasses" for their preference.

    But hey, one less subscription fee puts me that much closer to buying that bass boat and that piece of land I've been wanting to put a hunting cabin on. Both activities that'd allow for being not nostalgic about MMO gaming, but rather apathetic and flat out amnesic. And I'm certainly not the only one.

    "Many nights, my friend... Many nights I've put a blade to your throat while you were sleeping. Glad I never killed you, Steve. You're alright..."

    Chavez y Chavez

  • slashbeastslashbeast Member Posts: 533

    Sorry MMORPG.com, but you're F2P agenda won't get me to click on the thousands of F2P ads you have here to put money in your pockets.

    Honestly, everytime I see these F2P ads up here I'm always expecting to see at any moment a " Play our game now and enter for your chance to win a FREE Xbox 360!!! " in large flashy red. *puke*

  • DubhlaithDubhlaith Member Posts: 1,012

    I am not concerned with how I pay for a game, so long as it is not too much and, in F2P games, you cannot buy things that make you more powerful than other players.

    For me, it is all about the game. If the game is well-made, fun to play, and has a revenue method that works, I will give it a shot.

    What I despise if the F2P "movement." A plethora of games are being made that are absolutely atrocious, have no real value in terms of enjoyment, and are basically massive grindfests with no lore or point. It makes me sick.

    "Gamers will no longer buy the argument that every MMO requires a subscription fee to offset server and bandwidth costs. It's not true — you know it, and they know it." —Jeff Strain, co-founder of ArenaNet, 2007

    WTF? No subscription fee?

  • PapadamPapadam Member Posts: 2,102

     

    "I played a korean grinder and it costs hundreds of dollars to be competitive so F2P sucks!!!"

     

    People complain about cash shops in F2P games but seem ok with it in P2P games, I just cant understand the reasoning..

    [Mod Edit]

    If WoW = The Beatles
    and WAR = Led Zeppelin
    Then LotrO = Pink Floyd

  • vatzcarvatzcar Member Posts: 22

    Most of the F2P games sells all kind of boosts. Which actually let you fast forward the whole process. There's a simple calculation,

    Time = Money

    So, for F2P, it's Time = Game OR Money = Game. And for P2P it's Time + Money = Game.

    Now, P2P only proves to be cheaper if you think your Time = 0. But in other case it's almost neck-to-neck. I haven't played any F2P title yet, but don't hate 'em for any reason.

    Ohh... something with the title, "MOVEMENT"? Exaggeration should have a limit.

    A good programmer is the person who creates thousands of bugs while fixing hundreds!

  • StormvetStormvet Member Posts: 2

    Part of the reason for all of this falls on the gamer community itself. In my opinion, some people play MMORPGs for the wrong reasons - that being the misperception that their online exploits somehow prove something about their true selves, as in "If I can't be uber in real life I will do it in a fantasy world!"

    This leads to the F2P paradigm which is in reality "pay to win" where the word "win" can be any status or goal in the game where one can mistakenly claim he has "beaten" or "surpassed" other players. This can be everything from PvP kills to having the "rareset" armor/weapon, etc. Unfortunately, when work ethic is replaced by the ability to buy "greatness" then that perception becomes cheap and illegitimate.

    My remedy for this problem is for game developers to get back to the core of what an online game is supposed to be - a form of entertainment coupled with the ability to socialize in the process. As entertainment consumers, we gamers shouldn't be playing to "beat" other players or somehow derive real-life self-esteem from it all, we should merely seek a pleasurable means to piddle away free time - you know, like when one pops in and views a DvD. It's entertainment people, and nothing more.

    Here's what I'm getting at:

    In most "competitive" games built upon the grinding model, the only people who will be "leading" everyone else are going to be those players who were hardcore about the game on launch day who, moving forward, stick to their progress and don't let up. In other words, if you showed up to play a couple months after release by virtue of temporal positioning you will never overtake the "leaders" in the game so if you are after "greatness" you will never get it. Once people have played for a while and realize they are never going to be the "greatest" player, they tend to drop their subscription - after all who wants to pay good money to be some mere vassal where someone else is the great hero? No one. People pay money so that THEY get to be the great hero, not some milquetoast freak from XYZ who doesn't have a job and can play all day.

    However, if a game does not rely on grinding or "getting ahead" but is instead designed around merely entertaining the individual then it is more likely to maintain a subscription base because each player feels he is getting his money's worth - that being the entertainment value of HIS avatar being the hero.

    So, what I think needs to happen is game developers need to come up with a system where each player can feel he is the hero of the realm, yet online socialability survives. It has to be less about fake, contrived "competition" and more about entertainment for the individual in a social setting.

  • XianthosXianthos Member Posts: 723

    I can only agree with majority here, that at the end F2P draws out more money then any P2P tittle will ever will.

    If i remind that you have to spend at least 200 dollars a month in ROM PvP server to keep up (be viable) then compared to a P2P its a joke if you say "dont stress your wallet". Almost hypocratic.

    Too many of the "pay to win" menatility on deffenders site :P

    EvE doors

    See the best doors on EvE-on!

  • ZyonneZyonne Member Posts: 259

    The article has some valid points, but I think F2P as a term has become too broad to generalize. Yes, I get that all F2P games allow you to download, log in and play (to some extent) without spending money, but there are vast differences in how the games are funded.

    From a player's perspective, I'd say that...


    • ...being able to try out the game for free with no time limit, is a good thing, and as a bonus it is likely to keep the population healthy.

    • ...being able to log in once in a while without paying to reactivate the account, is a good thing when you don't play enough to justify keeping a subscription running.

    • ...having an item shop in a game is (in my opinion) always a bad thing. Having an item shop is pointless unless players have an incentive to use it, which obviously means the game has to be designed in such a way that gameplay will feel more rewarding if you purchase items from the shop. This is true even for cosmetic items, as it removes all sense of achievement from gaining them through playing the game.


    But, of course developers have to make money to keep a game alive, and preferably profitable enough to keep improving and expanding it. They don't need an item shop for that, though. A few options that can keep a game in the F2P category without funding it with an item shop are:

    • In-game ads. Works well with a hybrid model by removing them for paying customers.

    • Pay to unlock content. Not the same as an item shop since you are paying to extend the service rather than to enjoy what is already there. Also works well with a hybrid model.

    • Introduce a hybrid model where paying customers are the heroes, and free to play players are the working-class or monsters with no advancement options. I don't know of any games that actually do this, but a game designed from the start with this in mind would make an interesting twist on F2P. You can play for free and see what the game is like and provide services/entertainment for the subscribers, or subscribe to the game and experience a game-world where a part of the population is basically there for your convenience and entertainment.

    There are other options, I'm sure, but my point is that most of us who say we hate the F2P payment model are only really opposed to the item shop (Note that I say "item shop" not "cash shop". Not all microtransactions affect gameplay other than on a personal level, but having virtual items for sale always has a negative impact on the game. Either directly by giving an advantage to those buying them, or indirectly by making the game less fun, or even unplayable without them.) Since almost all F2P games are mainly funded through item shops, this is a valid gripe, but given all the alternate ways to fund a game classified as F2P, it's unfair to dismiss the entire subgenre. I'd rather play a game with full servers and a hybrid model than the same game as a ghost town with a P2P model. Just keep the damn item shop out of the business model!


  • WhyspreWhyspre Member UncommonPosts: 64

    nailed. Free to look at - significantly higher to play - DDO is unplayable solo unless you use the store. You WILL buy pots for SP/HP. LotRO going F2P is the highest level of cynicism... the term greedy bastards comes to mind. So - I'll stick with GW and wait until GW2 comes out.... at least I can play the game without having to spend spend spend....

     

  •  

    Congratulations, this article made me look up alternative sites for news on MMOs... I am fed up with this site not looking out for the interests of the PLAYERS. Rather, the sympathies of the site lie too skewed with the interests of the developers and companies. Whatever they want to push on us is just fine and dandy.

    I am currently subscribed to DDO and dabbling in Wizard 101. I am singularly unimpressed with the F2P model which at its core is player manipulation taken to a new level. We are simply being manipulated to spend more and more.

    And yes, player manipulation has always been a part of MMOs, I accept that. But why embrace a movement in the industry that makes the player manipulation worse???

    I think the industry lacks a good watch dog that acts in the interests of players and rates the parts of the game that gamers need reliable and easy to understand information on, such as a rating of the financial model being used and how your private data is respected.

  • XianthosXianthos Member Posts: 723

    Originally posted by Zyonne

    The article has some valid points, but I think F2P as a term has become too broad to generalize. Yes, I get that all F2P games allow you to download, log in and play (to some extent) without spending money, but there are vast differences in how the games are funded.

    From a player's perspective, I'd say that...


    • ...being able to try out the game for free with no time limit, is a good thing, and as a bonus it is likely to keep the population healthy.

    • ...being able to log in once in a while without paying to reactivate the account, is a good thing when you don't play enough to justify keeping a subscription running.

    • ...having an item shop in a game is (in my opinion) always a bad thing. Having an item shop is pointless unless players have an incentive to use it, which obviously means the game has to be designed in such a way that gameplay will feel more rewarding if you purchase items from the shop. This is true even for cosmetic items, as it removes all sense of achievement from gaining them through playing the game.


    But, of course developers have to make money to keep a game alive, and preferably profitable enough to keep improving and expanding it. They don't need an item shop for that, though. A few options that can keep a game in the F2P category without funding it with an item shop are:

    • In-game ads. Works well with a hybrid model by removing them for paying customers.

    • Pay to unlock content. Not the same as an item shop since you are paying to extend the service rather than to enjoy what is already there. Also works well with a hybrid model.

    • Introduce a hybrid model where paying customers are the heroes, and free to play players are the working-class or monsters with no advancement options. I don't know of any games that actually do this, but a game designed from the start with this in mind would make an interesting twist on F2P. You can play for free and see what the game is like and provide services/entertainment for the subscribers, or subscribe to the game and experience a game-world where a part of the population is basically there for your convenience and entertainment.

    There are other options, I'm sure, but my point is that most of us who say we hate the F2P payment model are only really opposed to the item shop (Note that I say "item shop" not "cash shop". Not all microtransactions affect gameplay other than on a personal level, but having virtual items for sale always has a negative impact on the game. Either directly by giving an advantage to those buying them, or indirectly by making the game less fun, or even unplayable without them.) Since almost all F2P games are mainly funded through item shops, this is a valid gripe, but given all the alternate ways to fund a game classified as F2P, it's unfair to dismiss the entire subgenre. I'd rather play a game with full servers and a hybrid model than the same game as a ghost town with a P2P model. Just keep the damn item shop out of the business model!


    And yet i have to find a single F2P game without an item shop :/

    Never then less a very true and valid post.

    EvE doors

    See the best doors on EvE-on!

  • TheNitewolfTheNitewolf Member Posts: 102

    Originally posted by hogscraper



    It sounds like too many of the above posters are missing the point. If you have compulsion issues that push you to play a game 60 hours a week, you'll have those same issues pushing you to spend ridiculous amounts of money to play a F2P game. After leveling to cap in two F2P games and halfway there in Battle of the Immortals atm I have spent a grand total of ten bucks. And that was last week to buy more backpack slots. You really do not have to spend money if you don't want to. If you end up dropping fifty a month to play a game, that's your fault and has nothing to do with anything but your own problems with control and patience in most of these games.


     

    *gasp* A voice of reason in the f2p witchhunt this site is known for, I can't believe it. I really don't know if I am rather amused or saddened by all those yelling "f2p isn't free but will cost you much more". I'm neither especially fond of f2p nor opposed and oddly enough I have yet to pay a single buck after playing half a dozen or so for quite some hours. Seems I must be doing something wrong.

    My Signature

  • scottnsscottns Member UncommonPosts: 231

    Originally posted by Hashbrick

    Embrace the F2P movement?

    Excuse me while I get a generic hotdog instead of a ballpark.

    Ballparks are gross. Get Kayems

  • XianthosXianthos Member Posts: 723

    Originally posted by TheNitewolf

    Originally posted by hogscraper



    It sounds like too many of the above posters are missing the point. If you have compulsion issues that push you to play a game 60 hours a week, you'll have those same issues pushing you to spend ridiculous amounts of money to play a F2P game. After leveling to cap in two F2P games and halfway there in Battle of the Immortals atm I have spent a grand total of ten bucks. And that was last week to buy more backpack slots. You really do not have to spend money if you don't want to. If you end up dropping fifty a month to play a game, that's your fault and has nothing to do with anything but your own problems with control and patience in most of these games.


     

    *gasp* A voice of reason in the f2p witchhunt this site is known for, I can't believe it. I really don't know if I am rather amused or saddened by all those yelling "f2p isn't free but will cost you much more". I'm neither especially fond of f2p nor opposed and oddly enough I have yet to pay a single buck after playing half a dozen or so for quite some hours. Seems I must be doing something wrong.

    Maybe because the most of people have a competative spirit and dont want to be at the end of the food chain?

    And btw see my sig. If you got plenty of time you can afford to grind in F2P but as casual you cant and will be forced to use a shop. Seen it, done it and got disqusted by it.

    EvE doors

    See the best doors on EvE-on!

  • chuck21222chuck21222 Member Posts: 2

    Originally posted by SBFord

    It’s merely a list of several reasons that the current trend of taking underperforming games and turning them into F2P titles is not succinctly “a bad thing”.

     

    When I first saw this article I figured I would read it out of curiousity, since I've tried a few F2P games, even though the main games I'm playing lately are WoW and Aion. I was stunned at this first sentence I quoted above, because the F2P games that immediately come to mind to me (Runes of Magic, Allods Online) were created as F2P games. They weren't subscribtion games that added F2P at a later date because of declining numbers.

    I think Runes of Magic is actually one of the best free games I've played to date. I played LOTRO beta and subscribed for one month and got tired of all the players in gen chat dissing the other games I was currently playing so I quit, and I'll never return free or not. DDO and now Everquest II going F2P are a real joke because their graphics are so outdated they can't even compare with the newer F2P games like Runes of Magic.

    I know how much players love to dis World of Warcraft, but at least they will be giving the game a total graphics overhaul and remake in the next expansion. That's probably why its still the most played MMORPG in the world after all this time. There are plenty of players like me who don't exclusively play WoW, but when we try something new we are actually driven away by the players base because of constant comments in gen chat like, "This game is so much better than WoW" and "WoW is for care bears and babies", etc., etc.. I've never understood why these players can't just try out a game on its own merits instead of constantly talking about the game they aren't playing.... Just my 2 cents!

  • SpartanPilotSpartanPilot Member UncommonPosts: 7

    You really think F2P is what makes games last longer? Have you never heard of World of Warcraft? Everquest? Everquest 2? All P2P that have lasted for years as such, longer than any F2P games that I can think of. It's un-researched, poorly though out articles like this one that prompted SOE's self-destructive choice to go F2P.

  • shinkanshinkan Member UncommonPosts: 240

    "F2P movement" lol

    I have yet to see a game that has actually benefitted from going free to play. F2P is for me a sign of resignation, their telling the world that the game is not good enough to make people subscribe to it.

    If they start talking about F2P in the games im playing, well I'll start looking around for options.

Sign In or Register to comment.